1
După aceea, Isus S-a dus dincolo de marea Galileii, numită marea Tiberiadei.
2
O mare gloată mergea după El, pentrucă vedea semnele pe cari le făcea cu cei bolnavi.
3
Isus S-a suit pe munte, şi şedea acolo cu ucenicii Săi.
4
Paştele, praznicul Iudeilor, erau aproape.
5
Isus Şi-a ridicat ochii, şi a văzut că o mare gloată vine spre El. Şi a zis lui Filip: ,,De unde avem să cumpărăm pâni ca să mănânce oamenii aceştia?``
6
Spunea lucrul acesta ca să-l încerce, pentrucă ştia ce are de gând să facă.
7
Filip i-a răspuns: ,,Pânile, pe cari le-am putea cumpăra cu două sute de lei (Greceşte: dinari.), n-ar ajunge ca fiecare să capete puţintel din ele.``
8
Unul din ucenicii Săi, Andrei, fratele lui Simon Petru, I-a zis:
9
,,Este aici un băieţel, care are cinci pâni de orz şi doi peşti; dar ce sânt acestea la atîţia?``
10
Isus a zis: ,,Spuneţi oamenilor să şadă jos.`` În locul acela era multă iarbă. Oamenii au şezut jos, în număr de aproape cinci mii.
11
Isus a luat pânile, a mulţămit lui Dumnezeu, le-a împărţit ucenicilor, iar ucenicii le-au împărţit celorce şedeau jos; de asemenea, le-a dat şi din peşti cât au voit.
12
Dupăce s-au săturat, Isus a zis ucenicilor Săi: ,,Strângeţi fărămiturile cari au rămas, ca să nu se piardă nimic.``
13
Le-au adunat deci, şi au umplut douăsprezece coşuri cu fărămiturile cari rămăseseră din cele cinci pâni de orz, după ce mâncaseră toţi.
14
Oamenii aceia, când au văzut minunea, pe care o făcuse Isus, ziceau: ,,Cu adevărat, acesta este proorocul cel aşteptat în lume.``
15
Isus, fiindcă ştia că au de gând să vină să -L ia cu sila ca să -L facă împărat, S-a dus iarăş la munte, numai El singur. Isus umblă pe mare.
16
Când s-a înserat, ucenicii Lui s-au coborât la marginea mării.
17
S-au suit într-o corabie, şi treceau marea, ca să se ducă în Capernaum. Se întunecase, şi Isus tot nu venise la ei.
18
Sufla un vânt puternic şi marea era întărâtată.
19
După ce au vâslit cam douăzeci şi cinci sau treizeci de stadii, văd pe Isus umblând pe mare şi apropiindu-Se de corabie. Şi s-au înfricoşat.
20
Dar Isus le-a zis: ,,Eu sânt, nu vă temeţi!``
21
Voiau deci să -L ia în corabie. Şi corabia a sosit îndată la locul spre care mergeau.
22
Norodul, care rămăsese de cealaltă parte a mării, băgase de seamă că acolo nu era decât o corabie, şi că Isus nu Se suise în corabia aceasta cu ucenicii Lui, ci ucenicii plecaseră singuri cu ea.
23
A doua zi sosiseră alte corăbii din Tiberiada, aproape de locul unde mâncaseră ei pânea, dupăce Domnul mulţămise lui Dumnezeu.
24
Când au văzut noroadele că nici Isus, nici ucenicii Lui nu erau acolo, s-au suit şi ele în corăbiile acestea, şi s-au dus la Capernaum să caute pe Isus.
25
Când L-au găsit, dincolo de mare, I-au zis: ,,Învăţătorule, când ai venit aici?``
26
Drept răspuns, Isus le-a zis: ,,Adevărat, adevărat, vă spun, că Mă căutaţi nu pentrucă aţi văzut semne, ci pentrucă aţi mâncat din pânile acelea, şi v-aţi săturat.
27
Lucraţi nu pentru mâncarea peritoare, ci pentru mâncarea, care rămâne pentru viaţa vecinică, şi pe care v-o va da Fiul omului; căci Tatăl, adică, însuş Dumnezeu, pe el L-a însemnat cu pecetea Lui.``
28
Ei I-au zis: ,,Ce să facem ca să săvârşim lucrările lui Dumnezeu?``
29
Isus le-a răspuns: ,,Lucrarea pe care o cere Dumnezeu este aceasta: să credeţi în Acela, pe care L-a trimes El.``
30
,,Ce semn faci Tu, deci``, I-au zis ei, ,,ca să-l vedem, şi să credem în Tine? Ce lucrezi Tu?
31
Părinţii noştri au mâncat mană în pustie, după cum este scris: ,Le-a dat să mănânce pâne din cer.``
32
Isus le-a zis: ,,Adevărat, adevărat, vă spun, că Moise nu v-a dat pânea din cer, ci Tatăl Meu vă dă adevărata pâne din cer;
33
căci Pânea lui Dumnezeu este aceea care se pogoară din cer, şi dă lumii viaţa``.
34
,,Doamne``, I-au zis ei, ,,dă-ne totdeauna această pâne.``
35
Isus le-a zis: ,,Eu sânt Pânea vieţii. Cine vine la Mine, nu va flămânzi niciodată; şi cine crede în Mine, nu va înseta niciodată.
36
Dar v-am spus că M-aţi şi văzut, şi tot nu credeţi.
37
Tot ce-Mi dă Tatăl, va ajunge la Mine; şi pe cel ce vine la Mine, nu-l voi izgoni afară:
38
căci M-am pogorât din cer ca să fac nu voia Mea, ci voia Celui ce M-a trimes.
39
Şi voia Celuice M-a trimes, este să nu pierd nimic din tot ce Mi-a dat El, ci să-l înviez în ziua de apoi.
40
Voia Tatălui meu este ca oricine vede pe Fiul, şi crede în El, să aibă viaţa vecinică; şi Eu îl voi învia în ziua de apoi.``
41
Iudeii cârteau împotriva Lui, pentrucă zisese: ,,Eu sânt pânea care s-a pogorât din cer.``
42
Şi ziceau: ,,Oare nu este acesta Isus, fiul lui Iosif, pe al cărui tată şi mamă îi cunoaştem? Cum dar zice El: ,Eu M-am pogorât din cer?``
43
Isus le-a răspuns: ,,Nu cârtiţi între voi.
44
Nimeni nu poate veni la Mine, dacă nu-l atrage Tatăl, care M-a trimes; şi Eu îl voi învia în ziua de apoi.
45
În prooroci este scris: ,Toţi vor fi învăţaţi de Dumnezeu.` Aşa că oricine a ascultat pe Tatăl, şi a primit învăţătura Lui, vine la Mine.
46
Nu că cineva a văzut pe Tatăl, afară de Acela care vine dela Dumnezeu; da, Acela a văzut pe Tatăl.
47
Adevărat, adevărat, vă spun, că cine crede în Mine, are viaţa vecinică.
48
Eu sânt Pânea vieţii.
49
Părinţii voştri au mâncat mană în pustie, şi au murit.
50
Pânea, care se pogoară din cer, este de aşa fel, ca cineva să mănânce din ea, şi să nu moară.
51
Eu sânt Pânea vie, care s-a pogorât din cer. Dacă mănâncă cineva din pânea aceasta, va trăi în veac; şi pânea, pe care o voi da Eu, este trupul Meu, pe care îl voi da pentru viaţa lumii.``
52
La auzul acestor cuvinte, Iudeii se certau între ei, şi ziceau: ,,Cum poate omul acesta să ne dea trupul Lui să-l mâncăm?``
53
Isus le-a zis: ,,Adevărat, adevărat, vă spun, că, dacă nu mâncaţi trupul Fiului omului, şi dacă nu beţi sângele Lui, n-aveţi viaţa în voi înşivă.
54
Cine mănâncă trupul Meu, şi bea sângele Meu, are viaţa vecinică; şi Eu îl voi învia în ziua de apoi.
55
Căci trupul Meu este cu adevărat o hrană, şi sângele Meu este cu adevărat o băutură.
56
Cine mănâncă trupul Meu, şi bea sângele Meu, rămâne în Mine, şi Eu rămân în el.
57
După cum Tatăl, care este viu, M-a trimes pe Mine, şi Eu trăiesc prin Tatăl, tot aşa, cine Mă mănâncă pe Mine, va trăi şi el prin Mine.
58
Astfel este pânea, care s-a pogorât din cer, nu ca mana, pe care au mâncat-o părinţii voştri, şi totuş au murit: cine mănâncă pânea aceasta, va trăi în veac.``
59
Isus a spus aceste lucruri în sinagogă, când învăţa pe oameni în Capernaum.
60
Mulţi din ucenicii Lui, după ce au auzit aceste cuvinte, au zis: ,,Vorbirea aceasta este prea de tot: cine poate s-o sufere?``
61
Isus, care ştia în Sine că ucenicii Săi cârteau împotriva vorbirii acesteia, le-a zis: ,,Vorbirea aceasta este pentru voi o pricină de poticnire?
62
Dar dacă aţi vedea pe Fiul omului suindu-Se unde era mai înainte?...
63
Duhul este acela care dă viaţă, carnea nu foloseşte la nimic; cuvintele, pe cari vi le-am spus Eu, sânt duh şi viaţă.
64
Dar sânt unii din voi cari nu cred.`` Căci Isus ştia dela început cine erau ceice nu cred, şi cine era celce avea să -L vândă.
65
Şi a adăogat: ,,Tocmai de aceea v-am spus că nimeni nu poate să vină la Mine, dacă nu i-a fost dat de Tatăl Meu.``
66
Din clipa aceea, mulţi din ucenicii Lui s-au întors înapoi, şi nu mai umblau cu El.
67
Atunci Isus a zis celor doisprezece: ,,Voi nu vreţi să vă duceţi?``
68
,,Doamne``, I-a răspuns Simon Petru, ,,la cine să ne ducem? Tu ai cuvintele vieţii vecinice.
69
Şi noi am crezut, şi am ajuns la cunoştinţa că Tu eşti Hristosul, Sfântul lui Dumnezeu.``
70
Isus le-a răspuns: ,,Nu v-am ales Eu pe voi cei doisprezece? Şi totuş unul din voi este un drac.``
71
Vorbea despre Iuda, fiul lui Simon Iscarioteanul; căci el avea să -L vândă: el, unul din cei doisprezece.
{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":19500,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19664,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","title_en":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20185,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of John","title_en":"Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","summary_en":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23482,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"the Lord’s Supper","title_en":"the Lord’s Supper","content_ro":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","summary_en":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":26017,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Miracle","title_en":"Miracle","content_ro":"<h3>MIRACLE<\/h3>\n<p>A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scripture the element of faith is crucial; a natural approach cannot prove or disprove the presence of “miracle.” The timing and content of the process can be miraculous, even though the event may seem natural. The revelatory significance is also important. In every case God performed the miracle not merely as a “wonder” to inspire awe but as a “sign” to draw people to himself.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheVocabularyofMiracles\">The Vocabulary of Miracles<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the two main terms are “sign” and “wonder,” which often occur together (e.g., nine times in Dt alone, 4:34; 13:1; etc.). More than one Hebrew term is used for “wonder”—one referring to it as an act of supernatural power and another as being beyond man’s understanding. On the whole, they are used synonymously for God’s providential acts within history. The “sign” refers to an act that occurs as a token or pledge of God’s control over events and as a revelation of God’s presence with his people.<\/p>\n<p>The NT uses the same basic idiom, “signs and wonders,” with the same general thrust (cf. Mt 24:24; Mk 13:22; Jn 4:48; Acts 2:43). A third term is that for “power” or miracle, and this becomes the predominant term in the synoptic Gospels. It signifies the mighty act itself by which God is revealed in Christ. A fourth term is “work,” which along with “sign” is preferred in the Gospel of John. This term is used in John to show that in Jesus the work of the Father is revealed. While the terms are often synonymous (the first three occur together in Rom 15:19-20; 2 Thes 2:9; Heb 2:4), they designate three different aspects of miracles. “Signs” point to the theological meaning of miracle as a revelation of God; “power,” to the force behind the act; “work,” to the person behind it; and “wonder,” to its awesome effect on the observer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheOldTestament\">Miracles in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>To the Hebrew, a miracle was nothing more nor less than an act of God. Therefore, nature herself was a miracle (Jb 5:9-10; Pss 89:6; 106:2), and an act of kindness or victory over one’s enemies is so described (Gn 24:12-27; 1 Sm 14:23). The natural order is totally under Yahweh’s control, so a miracle was observable not because of its supernatural nature but because of its character as part of the divine revelation. This connection with salvation history is crucial, for Israel at all times tried to guard against a desire for the spectacular. Deuteronomy 13:1-4 warns against accepting a wonder as authenticating a prophet; rather, the authentication must come from the fact that he worships Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles in the OT are restricted to critical periods of redemptive history. Many have discussed the act of Creation as the first miracle, but in actuality it is not presented as such in the Genesis account. A miracle is signified by its revelatory significance and\/or its connection with crucial points in the history of God’s people—the exodus, the conquest of Jordan, the battle against the insidious Baal worship of the prophetic period. Creation is characterized by one major theme: a chronicle of the beginnings. The miracles of Genesis—striking blind the inhabitants of Sodom, the Flood, Babel—all signify the wrath of God upon those who have turned against him. This is the other side of redemptive history, the judgment of God upon those who are not his people.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles of the exodus account have two foci: The plagues represent the absolute power of Yahweh over the gods of Egypt, and the miracles of the wilderness show God’s absolute care and protection of his people. The plagues are particularly interesting because each one is directed at one of the gods of Egypt and reveals Yahweh as the only potentate. The basic theme is found in Exodus 7:5 and is repeated throughout the account (cf. 7:17; 8:6, 18; 9:14-16, 29; 12:12): “When I show the Egyptians my power and force them to let the Israelites go, they will realize that I am the <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In this regard they were directed not only at the Egyptians but also to the Israelites, who needed to know that their God would vindicate them against the Egyptians. This is borne out in the major miracle, the crossing of the Red Sea. The plagues themselves show a gradual increase in severity.<\/p>\n<p>The wilderness miracles are intimately connected to the basic theme of the wandering narratives, the trial of Israel in times of desperate need and God’s providential protection of his people when they turn to him. The basic organization of the stories concerns the need itself, which leads to Israel’s complaint; this is followed by Moses’ intercession and then by God’s sovereign intervention. The miracles are interspersed with other stories that tell of God’s punishment when the people’s murmuring tries him too far. The miracle is God’s self-revelation regarding his involvement in the needs of his own; Israel must then respond, and her response determines her blessing or punishment at the hands of Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are conspicuously absent in the period of the united monarchy. This was a time of self-sufficiency, when God worked through the monarchy and did not intervene directly in the life of the nation. The reason is that Israel’s eschatological hopes had been realized and made concrete in the presence of the Holy City and the temple.<\/p>\n<p>It was different during the prophetic period. In the lives of Elijah and Elisha, miracles were predominant. This was a time of apostasy, and under the reign of Ahab and Jezebel the nation turned to paganism and the worship of Baal. The very existence of the Hebraic religion seemed to be threatened, and so the times called for extraordinary measures. Here the wondrous nature of the miracles is more evident than anywhere else in the OT. There are conscious allusions to the exodus miracles, perhaps looking to Elijah as a new Moses reinstituting the true worship of Yahweh. Parallels are seen in the challenge to the priests of Baal (1 Kgs 18; cf. Ex 7); the revelation of God on Mt Horeb with the wind, earthquake, and fire (1 Kgs 19; cf. Ex 19); and the parting of the Jordan (2 Kgs 2:10-14; cf. Ex 14). Many of the miracles were intended to demonstrate the impotence of Baal, such as the drought, the contest on Mt Carmel, and the miraculous sustenance supplied by God. Again, God’s actions within history were part of his self-revelation, the vindication of his messengers, and the punishment of his enemies.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are infrequent in the writing prophets, perhaps due to the proclamation form of the writings (i.e., they dealt with message rather than deeds). The two major exceptions (apart from the recovery of Hezekiah chronicled in Is 38) are Jonah and Daniel. In Jonah, the miracle is addressed not to the Ninevites but to the Israelites, who are called back to their covenant obligations as the spokesmen for Yahweh. In Daniel the direction is reversed, and the situation is the same as that in Exodus or Kings. The miracles are directed to the Babylonians and Persians and have the same foci as the earlier events of the exodus and Elijah-Elisha chronicles, that is, the supremacy of Yahweh over the foreign gods and the vindication of his messengers. This is the third and final time of crisis and illustrates the major theological use of miracles in the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheNewTestament\">Miracles in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the miraculous has a similar purpose in the NT; it occurred at a crisis point in salvation history to authenticate the presence of God in historical acts. It differs, however, in that it is transcended by the presence of the very Son of God, who himself is the greatest miracle of all. God now has not only acted in history; he has entered history and has turned it to himself. The parallels with the exodus events are obvious and show that the miracles of Jesus paved the way for the entrance of the new covenant in the same way that the exodus miracles prepared for the old.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Jesus’ Understanding<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus stressed the connection between his miraculous ministry, especially the casting out of demons (exorcism), and the coming of the kingdom of God. As in the OT, the miracles signify the presence of God, but here it is more direct and also signals the inauguration of his kingdom (Mt 12:28). As such, then, the exorcism miracles mean the binding of Satan and the institution of the reign of God (Mk 3:23-27). At the same time all the miracles signify the dawning of the age of salvation, as expressed in Jesus’ inaugural address at Nazareth (Lk 4:18-21, from Is 61:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Yet these miracles are not automatic signposts to the act of God; they must be interpreted by faith. Jesus was well aware of the presence of other miracles in his day (Mt 12:27) and so stressed the presence of faith in the healing miracles (Mk 5:32; 10:52). This faith must be directed to the presence of God in the event and in Jesus himself. The necessity of faith also helps to understand Jesus’ refusal to provide his contemporaries with a “sign” (Mk 8:11-12); miracles could never “prove” the presence of God. For a better understanding of the connection between faith and miracles, it is best to note each Evangelist’s individual portrait of the theological use of miracles.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Mark<\/h5>\n<p>Mark, the first of the four Gospels to be written, has often been called the “action Gospel” because of its emphasis on Jesus’ deeds rather than his teaching. This is also true regarding Jesus’ miracles, for Mark contains more proportionately than any of the others. There are five groups or five kinds of miracles in Mark. The first group centers on Jesus’ authority over demons (Mk 1:21-39). The second concerns Jesus’ authority over the law and conflict with his opponents (1:40–3:6). They result in fame but occasion his refusal to allow his true identity as Son of God to be known. The third group (3:7-30) contains exorcisms and the Beelzebub controversy, centering on his power over Satan. The fourth group (4:35–6:43) contains especially powerful miracles (stilling the storm, the Gaderene demoniac, the raising of Jairus’s daughter) and probably centers on the disciples, as Jesus thereby reveals to them the meaning of the kingdom and seeks to overcome their own spiritual dullness. The fifth and final group (6:30–8:26) continues the theme of the disciples’ misunderstanding and prepares the way for the Passion, with the message regarding the bread, blindness, and the judgment of God.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles in Mark center on conflict, first with Jesus’ opponents and then with his own disciples. While the miracles are harbingers of God’s kingdom, their purpose is to force an encounter with Jesus’ true significance. They do not show Jesus as a Hellenistic wonder worker; in fact, they lead only to amazement and then disbelief in those who do not have faith. Jesus’ personhood has been hidden and can only be understood in light of the cross. The miracles are not proofs but powers; God does not authenticate himself through them but shows himself to those with eyes to see.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Matthew<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s is the teaching Gospel, where dialogue takes precedence over action. Matthew compresses Mark’s narrative in order to make room for didactic material. Therefore, his stress is on the theological implications of faith rather than on the results they contain. Matthew’s groups of miracles are isometric to teaching passages, in keeping with his general practice of combining narrative portions and organizing them around didactic sections. The first group (chs 8–9) combines miracles from Mark’s first, second, and fourth groups and stresses Jesus’ significance as the servant of Yahweh who exercises sovereign power and forgives sins. The secondary theme teaches discipleship and shows the awakening faith of the disciples and their involvement in Jesus’ ministry. The second group (ch 12) centers on his authority over the law (the man with the withered hand) and over Satan (the Beelzebub controversy). The third group (chs 14–15) parallels Mark’s fifth group but has a different purpose. Rather than arousing conflict, the disciples are seen in positive guise, actively involved in the Master’s work. So the disciples become the means by which Jesus’ ministry is continued. Therefore, the disciples are involved as “learners” (the meaning of “disciple”) in his miraculous ministry.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Luke<\/h5>\n<p>Luke-Acts is remarkable and extremely important because it establishes beyond dispute the early church’s belief that it was in absolute continuity with Jesus and was continuing the work of God in the world. Luke’s major stress is on salvation history, and so one of his major stylistic methods for showing this direct connection is miraculous deeds. Especially enlightening here is Acts 9:32-42, where in two healing miracles Peter duplicated the Lord’s miracles (the paralytic Aeneas, Lk 5:18-26; the raising of Dorcas, Lk 8:49-56).<\/p>\n<p>From this respect also Luke returns to Mark’s interest in the deed more than the teaching. However, Luke goes even further than Mark, for the miracles validate Jesus more directly. The first group follows the inaugural address (4:18-22), which itself presents the miraculous deeds as authenticating signposts to Jesus’ personhood. They center on Jesus’ power and authority (vv 31-41) and validate God’s power in Jesus (5:17; 8:39) as well as faith in Jesus (seen in the “praise” motif, 5:25; 7:16; etc., but especially in Acts 9:35; 13:12; 19:17). The presence of “fear” at the miracles is a human response to having witnessed God’s power (Lk 5:26; 7:16; 8:35-37; 24:5). The call to the disciples occurs in the presence of miracles (5:1-11, at the miraculous catch of fish; vv 27-28, after the healing of the bedridden paralytic).<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, Luke views miracles as having redemptive significance. However, this is not contrary to Mark’s picture. Luke still avoids picturing Jesus as a mere wonder worker; Jesus still refuses to satisfy people’s curiosity for an external sign (Lk 11:29-32; cf. also 9:9), and in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (16:19-31) he teaches that the unbelieving heart can never be convinced by such events. Nevertheless, they can lead to repentance (10:13-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in John<\/h5>\n<p>John is the most directly theological of the Evangelists, and miracles are characteristically given a distinctive Johannine coloring. In the Synoptics, miracles are “acts of power” signifying the entrance of God’s reign into this world via Jesus; thereby, Jesus establishes Satan’s defeat and God’s sovereign control of history. John, however, contains no exorcisms, and the miracles are seen as “signs.” At the same time miracles are part of the larger category of “works” (the other term for miracles used in John), by which Jesus shows the Father’s presence in himself (Jn 10:32, 37-39; 14:10) and they give witness to Jesus as the sent one (5:36; 10:25, 38).<\/p>\n<p>John selects only seven “sign miracles” from many others (20:30) and uses them as part of the thematic development in the respective section of each. For instance, changing the water into wine is a messianic act, signifying the outpouring of the kingdom blessing in the ministry of Jesus, the Messiah (ch 2); the multiplication of the loaves builds upon the “bread of life” and points to the messianic banquet as spiritually present in Jesus (ch 6).<\/p>\n<p>The paradoxical nature of miracles in the Synoptics is even greater in John. He gives more stress to the wondrous nature of the events by providing such details as the stupendous amount of water changed into wine (2:6, approximately 120 gallons, or 454.2 liters); the distance over which Jesus’ healing power works (4:46, almost 20 miles, or 32.2 kilometers); the length of time the man of Bethesda had been lame (5:5, 38 years; cf. 9:1, where the man had been born blind); the amount of bread needed to feed the 5,000 (6:7, where Philip said 200 denarii, or days’ wages, would not have bought enough); and the proof of Lazarus’s death (11:39; he had already begun to decay). John has a great interest in the miraculous. Yet at the same time there is even greater stress on the inadequacy of miracles for faith. The miracles as “signs” have saving value and point to the true significance of Jesus but are related to an awakening faith and in themselves are insufficient (2:11; 4:50). They have christological force, looking to Jesus’ sonship and the Father’s authentication of him but are based on the soteriological decision of the individual. As “signs,” they contain the very presence of God in Jesus, the spiritual reality of the “sight” and “life” he brings (9:35-38; 11:24-26). Yet their purpose is to divide the audience and confront it with the necessity of decision. Two camps result—those seeking understanding and those considering only the outward aspects. Some refuse to consider the signs, and thus they reject them (3:18-21; 11:47-50), while others see them shallowly as mere wonders and fail to see in them the true significance of Jesus (2:23-25; 4:45). On the other hand, some view them with the eye of faith and go on to a realization of his personhood (2:11; 5:36-46; 11:42). In John the highest faith of all is that which does not need external stimulation (20:29).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in the Rest of the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>Apart from Acts, several passages in the NT speak of the value of miracles. Paul in 2 Corinthians 12:12 and Romans 15:18-19 considered them as “sign-gifts,” which authenticated the divine authority of the “true apostle.” He listed healing and miracles as specific “gifts of the Spirit” in 1 Corinthians 12:9-10. In Galatians 3:5 he considered them evidence for the presence of the Spirit. The author of the letter to the Hebrews in 2:4 said “God bore witness” to the true message of salvation via miracles. Therefore, in the apostolic age the miracles of God’s servants were seen more directly as authenticating signs of God’s action in his messengers.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Sign; Spiritual Gifts.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MIRACLE<\/h3>\n<p>A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scripture the element of faith is crucial; a natural approach cannot prove or disprove the presence of “miracle.” The timing and content of the process can be miraculous, even though the event may seem natural. The revelatory significance is also important. In every case God performed the miracle not merely as a “wonder” to inspire awe but as a “sign” to draw people to himself.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheVocabularyofMiracles\">The Vocabulary of Miracles<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the two main terms are “sign” and “wonder,” which often occur together (e.g., nine times in Dt alone, 4:34; 13:1; etc.). More than one Hebrew term is used for “wonder”—one referring to it as an act of supernatural power and another as being beyond man’s understanding. On the whole, they are used synonymously for God’s providential acts within history. The “sign” refers to an act that occurs as a token or pledge of God’s control over events and as a revelation of God’s presence with his people.<\/p>\n<p>The NT uses the same basic idiom, “signs and wonders,” with the same general thrust (cf. Mt 24:24; Mk 13:22; Jn 4:48; Acts 2:43). A third term is that for “power” or miracle, and this becomes the predominant term in the synoptic Gospels. It signifies the mighty act itself by which God is revealed in Christ. A fourth term is “work,” which along with “sign” is preferred in the Gospel of John. This term is used in John to show that in Jesus the work of the Father is revealed. While the terms are often synonymous (the first three occur together in Rom 15:19-20; 2 Thes 2:9; Heb 2:4), they designate three different aspects of miracles. “Signs” point to the theological meaning of miracle as a revelation of God; “power,” to the force behind the act; “work,” to the person behind it; and “wonder,” to its awesome effect on the observer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheOldTestament\">Miracles in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>To the Hebrew, a miracle was nothing more nor less than an act of God. Therefore, nature herself was a miracle (Jb 5:9-10; Pss 89:6; 106:2), and an act of kindness or victory over one’s enemies is so described (Gn 24:12-27; 1 Sm 14:23). The natural order is totally under Yahweh’s control, so a miracle was observable not because of its supernatural nature but because of its character as part of the divine revelation. This connection with salvation history is crucial, for Israel at all times tried to guard against a desire for the spectacular. Deuteronomy 13:1-4 warns against accepting a wonder as authenticating a prophet; rather, the authentication must come from the fact that he worships Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles in the OT are restricted to critical periods of redemptive history. Many have discussed the act of Creation as the first miracle, but in actuality it is not presented as such in the Genesis account. A miracle is signified by its revelatory significance and\/or its connection with crucial points in the history of God’s people—the exodus, the conquest of Jordan, the battle against the insidious Baal worship of the prophetic period. Creation is characterized by one major theme: a chronicle of the beginnings. The miracles of Genesis—striking blind the inhabitants of Sodom, the Flood, Babel—all signify the wrath of God upon those who have turned against him. This is the other side of redemptive history, the judgment of God upon those who are not his people.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles of the exodus account have two foci: The plagues represent the absolute power of Yahweh over the gods of Egypt, and the miracles of the wilderness show God’s absolute care and protection of his people. The plagues are particularly interesting because each one is directed at one of the gods of Egypt and reveals Yahweh as the only potentate. The basic theme is found in Exodus 7:5 and is repeated throughout the account (cf. 7:17; 8:6, 18; 9:14-16, 29; 12:12): “When I show the Egyptians my power and force them to let the Israelites go, they will realize that I am the <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In this regard they were directed not only at the Egyptians but also to the Israelites, who needed to know that their God would vindicate them against the Egyptians. This is borne out in the major miracle, the crossing of the Red Sea. The plagues themselves show a gradual increase in severity.<\/p>\n<p>The wilderness miracles are intimately connected to the basic theme of the wandering narratives, the trial of Israel in times of desperate need and God’s providential protection of his people when they turn to him. The basic organization of the stories concerns the need itself, which leads to Israel’s complaint; this is followed by Moses’ intercession and then by God’s sovereign intervention. The miracles are interspersed with other stories that tell of God’s punishment when the people’s murmuring tries him too far. The miracle is God’s self-revelation regarding his involvement in the needs of his own; Israel must then respond, and her response determines her blessing or punishment at the hands of Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are conspicuously absent in the period of the united monarchy. This was a time of self-sufficiency, when God worked through the monarchy and did not intervene directly in the life of the nation. The reason is that Israel’s eschatological hopes had been realized and made concrete in the presence of the Holy City and the temple.<\/p>\n<p>It was different during the prophetic period. In the lives of Elijah and Elisha, miracles were predominant. This was a time of apostasy, and under the reign of Ahab and Jezebel the nation turned to paganism and the worship of Baal. The very existence of the Hebraic religion seemed to be threatened, and so the times called for extraordinary measures. Here the wondrous nature of the miracles is more evident than anywhere else in the OT. There are conscious allusions to the exodus miracles, perhaps looking to Elijah as a new Moses reinstituting the true worship of Yahweh. Parallels are seen in the challenge to the priests of Baal (1 Kgs 18; cf. Ex 7); the revelation of God on Mt Horeb with the wind, earthquake, and fire (1 Kgs 19; cf. Ex 19); and the parting of the Jordan (2 Kgs 2:10-14; cf. Ex 14). Many of the miracles were intended to demonstrate the impotence of Baal, such as the drought, the contest on Mt Carmel, and the miraculous sustenance supplied by God. Again, God’s actions within history were part of his self-revelation, the vindication of his messengers, and the punishment of his enemies.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are infrequent in the writing prophets, perhaps due to the proclamation form of the writings (i.e., they dealt with message rather than deeds). The two major exceptions (apart from the recovery of Hezekiah chronicled in Is 38) are Jonah and Daniel. In Jonah, the miracle is addressed not to the Ninevites but to the Israelites, who are called back to their covenant obligations as the spokesmen for Yahweh. In Daniel the direction is reversed, and the situation is the same as that in Exodus or Kings. The miracles are directed to the Babylonians and Persians and have the same foci as the earlier events of the exodus and Elijah-Elisha chronicles, that is, the supremacy of Yahweh over the foreign gods and the vindication of his messengers. This is the third and final time of crisis and illustrates the major theological use of miracles in the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheNewTestament\">Miracles in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the miraculous has a similar purpose in the NT; it occurred at a crisis point in salvation history to authenticate the presence of God in historical acts. It differs, however, in that it is transcended by the presence of the very Son of God, who himself is the greatest miracle of all. God now has not only acted in history; he has entered history and has turned it to himself. The parallels with the exodus events are obvious and show that the miracles of Jesus paved the way for the entrance of the new covenant in the same way that the exodus miracles prepared for the old.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Jesus’ Understanding<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus stressed the connection between his miraculous ministry, especially the casting out of demons (exorcism), and the coming of the kingdom of God. As in the OT, the miracles signify the presence of God, but here it is more direct and also signals the inauguration of his kingdom (Mt 12:28). As such, then, the exorcism miracles mean the binding of Satan and the institution of the reign of God (Mk 3:23-27). At the same time all the miracles signify the dawning of the age of salvation, as expressed in Jesus’ inaugural address at Nazareth (Lk 4:18-21, from Is 61:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Yet these miracles are not automatic signposts to the act of God; they must be interpreted by faith. Jesus was well aware of the presence of other miracles in his day (Mt 12:27) and so stressed the presence of faith in the healing miracles (Mk 5:32; 10:52). This faith must be directed to the presence of God in the event and in Jesus himself. The necessity of faith also helps to understand Jesus’ refusal to provide his contemporaries with a “sign” (Mk 8:11-12); miracles could never “prove” the presence of God. For a better understanding of the connection between faith and miracles, it is best to note each Evangelist’s individual portrait of the theological use of miracles.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Mark<\/h5>\n<p>Mark, the first of the four Gospels to be written, has often been called the “action Gospel” because of its emphasis on Jesus’ deeds rather than his teaching. This is also true regarding Jesus’ miracles, for Mark contains more proportionately than any of the others. There are five groups or five kinds of miracles in Mark. The first group centers on Jesus’ authority over demons (Mk 1:21-39). The second concerns Jesus’ authority over the law and conflict with his opponents (1:40–3:6). They result in fame but occasion his refusal to allow his true identity as Son of God to be known. The third group (3:7-30) contains exorcisms and the Beelzebub controversy, centering on his power over Satan. The fourth group (4:35–6:43) contains especially powerful miracles (stilling the storm, the Gaderene demoniac, the raising of Jairus’s daughter) and probably centers on the disciples, as Jesus thereby reveals to them the meaning of the kingdom and seeks to overcome their own spiritual dullness. The fifth and final group (6:30–8:26) continues the theme of the disciples’ misunderstanding and prepares the way for the Passion, with the message regarding the bread, blindness, and the judgment of God.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles in Mark center on conflict, first with Jesus’ opponents and then with his own disciples. While the miracles are harbingers of God’s kingdom, their purpose is to force an encounter with Jesus’ true significance. They do not show Jesus as a Hellenistic wonder worker; in fact, they lead only to amazement and then disbelief in those who do not have faith. Jesus’ personhood has been hidden and can only be understood in light of the cross. The miracles are not proofs but powers; God does not authenticate himself through them but shows himself to those with eyes to see.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Matthew<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s is the teaching Gospel, where dialogue takes precedence over action. Matthew compresses Mark’s narrative in order to make room for didactic material. Therefore, his stress is on the theological implications of faith rather than on the results they contain. Matthew’s groups of miracles are isometric to teaching passages, in keeping with his general practice of combining narrative portions and organizing them around didactic sections. The first group (chs 8–9) combines miracles from Mark’s first, second, and fourth groups and stresses Jesus’ significance as the servant of Yahweh who exercises sovereign power and forgives sins. The secondary theme teaches discipleship and shows the awakening faith of the disciples and their involvement in Jesus’ ministry. The second group (ch 12) centers on his authority over the law (the man with the withered hand) and over Satan (the Beelzebub controversy). The third group (chs 14–15) parallels Mark’s fifth group but has a different purpose. Rather than arousing conflict, the disciples are seen in positive guise, actively involved in the Master’s work. So the disciples become the means by which Jesus’ ministry is continued. Therefore, the disciples are involved as “learners” (the meaning of “disciple”) in his miraculous ministry.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Luke<\/h5>\n<p>Luke-Acts is remarkable and extremely important because it establishes beyond dispute the early church’s belief that it was in absolute continuity with Jesus and was continuing the work of God in the world. Luke’s major stress is on salvation history, and so one of his major stylistic methods for showing this direct connection is miraculous deeds. Especially enlightening here is Acts 9:32-42, where in two healing miracles Peter duplicated the Lord’s miracles (the paralytic Aeneas, Lk 5:18-26; the raising of Dorcas, Lk 8:49-56).<\/p>\n<p>From this respect also Luke returns to Mark’s interest in the deed more than the teaching. However, Luke goes even further than Mark, for the miracles validate Jesus more directly. The first group follows the inaugural address (4:18-22), which itself presents the miraculous deeds as authenticating signposts to Jesus’ personhood. They center on Jesus’ power and authority (vv 31-41) and validate God’s power in Jesus (5:17; 8:39) as well as faith in Jesus (seen in the “praise” motif, 5:25; 7:16; etc., but especially in Acts 9:35; 13:12; 19:17). The presence of “fear” at the miracles is a human response to having witnessed God’s power (Lk 5:26; 7:16; 8:35-37; 24:5). The call to the disciples occurs in the presence of miracles (5:1-11, at the miraculous catch of fish; vv 27-28, after the healing of the bedridden paralytic).<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, Luke views miracles as having redemptive significance. However, this is not contrary to Mark’s picture. Luke still avoids picturing Jesus as a mere wonder worker; Jesus still refuses to satisfy people’s curiosity for an external sign (Lk 11:29-32; cf. also 9:9), and in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (16:19-31) he teaches that the unbelieving heart can never be convinced by such events. Nevertheless, they can lead to repentance (10:13-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in John<\/h5>\n<p>John is the most directly theological of the Evangelists, and miracles are characteristically given a distinctive Johannine coloring. In the Synoptics, miracles are “acts of power” signifying the entrance of God’s reign into this world via Jesus; thereby, Jesus establishes Satan’s defeat and God’s sovereign control of history. John, however, contains no exorcisms, and the miracles are seen as “signs.” At the same time miracles are part of the larger category of “works” (the other term for miracles used in John), by which Jesus shows the Father’s presence in himself (Jn 10:32, 37-39; 14:10) and they give witness to Jesus as the sent one (5:36; 10:25, 38).<\/p>\n<p>John selects only seven “sign miracles” from many others (20:30) and uses them as part of the thematic development in the respective section of each. For instance, changing the water into wine is a messianic act, signifying the outpouring of the kingdom blessing in the ministry of Jesus, the Messiah (ch 2); the multiplication of the loaves builds upon the “bread of life” and points to the messianic banquet as spiritually present in Jesus (ch 6).<\/p>\n<p>The paradoxical nature of miracles in the Synoptics is even greater in John. He gives more stress to the wondrous nature of the events by providing such details as the stupendous amount of water changed into wine (2:6, approximately 120 gallons, or 454.2 liters); the distance over which Jesus’ healing power works (4:46, almost 20 miles, or 32.2 kilometers); the length of time the man of Bethesda had been lame (5:5, 38 years; cf. 9:1, where the man had been born blind); the amount of bread needed to feed the 5,000 (6:7, where Philip said 200 denarii, or days’ wages, would not have bought enough); and the proof of Lazarus’s death (11:39; he had already begun to decay). John has a great interest in the miraculous. Yet at the same time there is even greater stress on the inadequacy of miracles for faith. The miracles as “signs” have saving value and point to the true significance of Jesus but are related to an awakening faith and in themselves are insufficient (2:11; 4:50). They have christological force, looking to Jesus’ sonship and the Father’s authentication of him but are based on the soteriological decision of the individual. As “signs,” they contain the very presence of God in Jesus, the spiritual reality of the “sight” and “life” he brings (9:35-38; 11:24-26). Yet their purpose is to divide the audience and confront it with the necessity of decision. Two camps result—those seeking understanding and those considering only the outward aspects. Some refuse to consider the signs, and thus they reject them (3:18-21; 11:47-50), while others see them shallowly as mere wonders and fail to see in them the true significance of Jesus (2:23-25; 4:45). On the other hand, some view them with the eye of faith and go on to a realization of his personhood (2:11; 5:36-46; 11:42). In John the highest faith of all is that which does not need external stimulation (20:29).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in the Rest of the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>Apart from Acts, several passages in the NT speak of the value of miracles. Paul in 2 Corinthians 12:12 and Romans 15:18-19 considered them as “sign-gifts,” which authenticated the divine authority of the “true apostle.” He listed healing and miracles as specific “gifts of the Spirit” in 1 Corinthians 12:9-10. In Galatians 3:5 he considered them evidence for the presence of the Spirit. The author of the letter to the Hebrews in 2:4 said “God bore witness” to the true message of salvation via miracles. Therefore, in the apostolic age the miracles of God’s servants were seen more directly as authenticating signs of God’s action in his messengers.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Sign; Spiritual Gifts.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MIRACLE A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scri...","summary_en":"MIRACLE A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scri...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28780,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Palestine*","title_en":"Palestine*","content_ro":"<h3>PALESTINE*<\/h3>\n<p>Country on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea, also known as Canaan and Israel. Palestine was situated at the west end of the Fertile Crescent—that arching stretch of highly productive land that ran from the Persian Gulf through Mesopotamia and Syria to Egypt. Palestine lay in a unique position, for it constituted a land bridge between Mesopotamia and Egypt, the two primary cultural centers of the ancient Near East. It also served as a connection between the continents of Asia and Africa and as a continental link between Africa and Europe. Trade moved by well-defined routes as goods were brought into the Fertile Crescent from as far as northern Europe, India, and south of Egypt. The same roads were followed by prospective conquerors as they moved their armies from area to area in quest of power and wealth.<\/p>\n<p>It was the land promised by God to Abraham and his descendants, the homeland of God’s chosen people, and the geographical scene for much of biblical history. It has become a land sacred to three great world religions: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Physically, Palestine is a kind of microcosm. In a stretch of 150 miles (241.4 kilometers) one can find almost every kind of climate and terrain known on the earth. It has fertile plains, sandy deserts, rocky wastes, forests, mountains, lakes, and rivers. With such a variety in so small an area, the land provides sharp contrasts. In the north, Mt Hermon stands perpetually snowcapped at an altitude of about 9,100 feet (2,773.7 meters), while a scant 100 miles (160.9 kilometers) distant in the subtropical depression of the Jordan Valley is the Dead Sea, representing the deepest spot on the earth.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Name<\/p>\n<p>• Territory<\/p>\n<p>• Climate<\/p>\n<p>• Geography<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Name\">Name<\/p>\n<p>This land has been known by many names over its long history. The country seems to have been named after the maritime region, perhaps because this was the area that most foreigners contacted. So the land was called Canaan and later named after Philistia. In the table of nations, Canaan is said to have extended from Sidon in the north toward Gerar as far as Gaza and east toward the Cities of the Plain (Gn 10:19). The name Canaan appears in the Bible; the first occurrence of the name as that of a country or region is in Genesis 11:31.<\/p>\n<p>After the Israelite conquest of Canaan, the country was known as the land of Israel (1 Sm 13:19; 1 Chr 22:2). With the division of the kingdom in the reign of Rehoboam (930 <span>BC<\/span>), the name Israel went with the northern kingdom, and the southern kingdom was known as Judah (later, Judea).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Territory\">Territory<\/p>\n<p>The earliest reference to the extent of Palestine appears in the promise of the land to Abraham and to his descendants (Gn 15:18-21). Here the borders are given as the River of Egypt (Wadi el-Arish) in the southwest to the Euphrates River in the northeast. It is further defined in terms of the peoples who occupied it at that time, 10 in all, including the Kenites, the Kenizzites, the Kadmonites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites, and the Jebusites. In Genesis 17:8 the land is called simply “all the land of Canaan.”<\/p>\n<p>The Lord gave more detailed directions to Moses concerning the borders of the land that Israel was to occupy (Nm 34:1-12). The southern boundary was to be from the River of Egypt to the south of Kadesh-barnea and along the wilderness of Zin to the southern extremity of the Dead Sea. The western boundary was the Mediterranean, the northern border was set at the entrance to Hamath, and the eastern limit was the Jordan River and the Dead Sea.<\/p>\n<p>The greatest extent of the Promised Land is seen in the Lord’s declaration to Moses that he would set the bounds of Israel from the Red Sea to the Sea of the Philistines (Mediterranean) and from the wilderness to the Euphrates River (Ex 23:31). Historically, during the period of the judges and the reign of Saul, Israel did not conquer the land that had been given to the tribes in the division under Joshua. The military strength of David and the diplomacy of Solomon enabled them to achieve a marked expansion of Israelite rule. David defeated Hadadezer, king of Zobah, and thus pushed his northern frontier to the Euphrates River; he defeated Syria, Ammon, Moab, Edom, and Amalek, enlarging the kingdom also to the east and south (2 Sm 8:1-14; 1 Chr 18:1-13). Solomon had a fleet of merchant ships stationed at Ezion-geber on the Gulf of Aqaba. He also engaged in copper mining in that area.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Climate\">Climate<\/p>\n<p>It has been said that the climate of Palestine is more varied than that of any other area of comparable size in the world. Generally, the climate may be described as temperate; at Jerusalem, for example, the temperature extremes range from 26°F (-3.3°C) to 107°F (41.6°C), and the average annual rainfall is about 20 inches (50.8 centimeters). The coastal plain is warmer and has been compared to the east coast of Florida. The average annual temperature at Jaffa (Joppa) is 67° F (19.4°C). The Jordan Valley in the area of the Dead Sea is subtropical; in summer its temperatures may reach 120°F (48.8°C).<\/p>\n<p>Rainfall is seasonal, with rain coming in the cooler months of the year as the prevailing west wind brings moisture over the comparatively colder land area, much like the “lake effect” snows of the Great Lakes region of the United States. The rainy season extends from October to April. Within this time the Israelites singled out two periods (Jer 5:24; Jl 2:23), the former rain and the latter rain, with the former rain occurring in the months of October and November and the latter rain falling in March and April. The coastal area receives about 28 inches (71.1 centimeters) of rain annually, while the average for the country in general is 22 to 24 inches (55.9–70 centimeters).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>For purposes of description, the land of Palestine may be conveniently divided into five longitudinal sections:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Maritime or Coastal Plain<\/p>\n<li>2. The Shephelah<\/li>\n<li>3. The Western Plateau or Hill Country<\/li>\n<li>4. The Arabah or Jordan Valley<\/li>\n<li>5. The Eastern Plateau or Transjordan<\/li>\n<p>These divisions are based essentially on differences in elevation, but other geographic elements also serve to mark their limits or otherwise distinguish them.<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Maritime or Coastal Plain<\/h5>\n<p>The Maritime or Coastal Plain may be divided into three separate plains from south to north: the plain of Philistia, the plain of Sharon, and the plain of Acre.<\/p>\n<p>1. The plain of Philistia begins with the Wadi el-Arish, or River of Egypt, and extends north to the Nahr el-Auja, about five miles (8 kilometers) north of Joppa. This plain is about 70 miles (112.6 kilometers) long and reaches its greatest width in the latitude of Gaza, where it measures about 30 miles (48.3 kilometers). Along the Mediterranean there were dunes of sand, but for the most part, this area was very fertile and admirably suited for the production of grain.<\/p>\n<li>2. The plain of Sharon is not sharply demarcated from the Philistine plain and was probably under Philistine control, but the OT recognizes it as a separate entity (cf. Sg 2:1; Is 65:10). The plain extends north to Mt Carmel. On the coast are the town of Dor, which is mentioned in “The Tale of Wenamon,” and the city of Caesarea, where Herod the Great did much building.<\/li>\n<li>3. Beyond the promontory of Carmel lies a bay on which was situated the city named Ptolemais (Acts 21:7), also known as Acre or Acco (Jgs 1:31). Here a narrow plain stretches some 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) to the Ladder of Tyre (Ras en-Nakurah). The Kishon River (Jgs 4:7, 13; 1 Kgs 18:40) flows through this plain to the sea.<\/li>\n<h5>The Shephelah<\/h5>\n<p>The Shephelah constitutes a kind of “midlands,” intermediate between the lowlands of the coastal plain and the highlands of the Western Plateau, with an elevation of about 500 to 1,000 feet (152.4– 304.8 meters) and a width of only a few miles. It extends from the valley of Aijalon to Beersheba.<\/p>\n<p>The valleys of the Shephelah produced grain crops, while the hills were well suited for grapes and olives. The region was very important strategically, because it afforded approaches to Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<h5>The Western Plateau or Hill Country<\/h5>\n<p>The Western Plateau or Hill Country ranges from 1,000 to 4,000 feet (304.8–609.6 meters) in elevation and covers some 150 miles (241.4 kilometers) from Lebanon to Beersheba. It may also be divided into three areas: Galilee, Samaria, and Judea.<\/p>\n<p>1. Galilee may be regarded as two parts, Upper Galilee (2,000–4,000 feet, or 609.6–1,219.2 meters) and Lower Galilee (below 2,000 feet, or 609.6 meters). The area was agricultural and pastoral, like much of Palestine, and was open to invasion. The highways that traversed Galilee made it a cosmopolitan district, so that Isaiah 9:1 calls it “Galilee of the nations.”<\/p>\n<li>2. Samaria was also suitable for crops and pasture. The brothers of Joseph were grazing their flocks in the plain of Dothan when Joseph visited them and became the victim of their conspiracy (Gn 37:17).<\/li>\n<li>3. Judea has an elevation of about 2,000 to 3,500 feet (609.6–1,066.8 meters) and reaches some 60 miles (96.5 kilometers) from Bethel to Beersheba. The city of Jerusalem stands at an elevation of 2,654 feet (808.9 meters), surrounded by mountains and valleys that served as part of its defense system (Ps 125:2). This was the heart of the nation, for from the time of David onward, the capital was here, and more important, the ark of the covenant had been brought here during David’s reign. As the Lord had long foretold, Jerusalem had become the center of his worship; here Solomon built the temple, one of the greatest structures ever made.<\/li>\n<h5>The Arabah or Jordan Valley<\/h5>\n<p>The Arabah or Jordan Valley presents the extremes of height and depth. Mt Hermon rises to 9,166 feet (2,793.8 meters), while the surface of the Dead Sea lies 1,275 feet (395 meters) below sea level, and at its deepest part the sea plunges another 1,300 feet (396.2 meters).<\/p>\n<p>1. The North Arabah or Upper Jordan Valley. The Jordan River has four sources, all near Mt Hermon. The Jordan flows through what was Lake Huleh, now partly drained and designated as a wildlife refuge. Two miles (3.2 kilometers) below the Huleh basin is the Bridge of Jacob’s Daughters, by which the old road to Damascus crossed the river. The Jordan then flows into a gorge some 1,200 feet (365.8 meters) deep.<\/p>\n<li>2. The Sea of Galilee, about 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) from Huleh, has an elevation of -685 feet (-208.8 meters). It measures 15 by 8 miles (24.1 by 12.9 kilometers), with a maximum depth of 750 feet (228.6 meters). The shape of the lake gave it the OT name, Chinnereth, meaning “harp” (Nm 34:11; Jos 13:27). In the NT it was also called the Lake of Gennesaret (Lk 5:1) and the Sea of Tiberias (Jn 6:1; 21:1).<\/li>\n<li>3. The Middle Arabah, or Ghor. The name Jordan means “descender”; in the 60 miles or 96.5 kilometers (in a straight line) from the outlet of the Sea of Galilee to the northern end of the Dead Sea there is a fall of more than 600 feet (182.9 meters), or 10 feet per mile. The river flows in a series of S-curves or zigzags, so that its actual course between Galilee and the Dead Sea covers some 200 miles (321.8 kilometers).<\/li>\n<p>This stretch of the Jordan Valley is known as the Ghor, or Rift. Six miles (9.7 kilometers) below the Sea of Galilee the Yarmuk River enters from the east. Some smaller streams empty into the Jordan, but the next river of consequence is the Jabbok (Gn 32:22). Just south of the Sea of Galilee the Ghor is about four miles (6.4 kilometers) wide; near Beth-shan it reaches seven miles (11.3 kilometers) wide; beyond that for some 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) the mountains close in on the river on both sides, narrowing the valley to two to three miles (3.2 to 4.8 kilometers); near Jericho it broadens to about 12 miles (19.3 kilometers).<\/p>\n<li>4. The Dead Sea is unique. Its surface is the deepest point on the face of the earth and its waters are of tremendous wealth. In the OT it is known as the Salt Sea (Gn 14:3; Nm 34:12; Jos 12:3) and the Sea of Arabah (Jos 12:3). Josephus calls it Lake Asphaltitis.<\/li>\n<p>This body of water is 46 miles (74 kilometers) long, 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) wide, and 1,300 feet (396.2 meters) deep and consists of about 25 percent mineral matter, making it a chemical deposit of great value. In addition to the flow of the Jordan, the Dead Sea receives the water of other streams, such as the Arnon River on the east. Much of the runoff of the seasonal rains also finds its way into the Salt Sea. Temperatures in the valley may reach 120° F (48.8° C) in summer; with the extreme humidity the climate is very debilitating and almost unbearable. It is estimated that the daily evaporation from the sea is 6 to 8 million tons (5.4–7.3 million metric tons).<\/p>\n<li>5. The Southern Arabah, mostly a barren wilderness, extends from the Dead Sea to the Gulf of Aqaba, a distance of 150 miles (241.4 kilometers). There is a gradual ascent from the Dead Sea to a watershed just west of Petra. Near the tip of the Gulf of Aqaba were the ports of Elath (modern Eilat) and Ezion-geber.<\/li>\n<h5>The Eastern Plateau or Transjordan<\/h5>\n<p>The Eastern Plateau, or Transjordan, was not named as part of the land of promise, but it was taken by the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and half of Manasseh. The region is better supplied with water than the Western Plateau and has perennial streams, such as the Yarmuk, Jabbok, and Arnon. A principal north-south road was the King’s Highway, followed by the Israelites during the exodus (Nm 21:22) and probably also the route taken by the invading kings of Genesis 14.<\/p>\n<p>The northern section of Transjordan was known as Bashan, noted for its cattle (Ps 22:12; Ez 39:18) and for its oak trees (Is 2:13; Zec 11:2).<\/p>\n<p>Gilead, famed for its balm (Gn 37:25; Jer 8:22), was often mentioned in the OT (e.g., Dt 3:10-16; Jgs 11). It extended from the Yarmuk River to the city of Heshbon. This area was heavily forested in David’s time (cf. 2 Sm 18:8).<\/p>\n<p>In Palestine proper there were two important divisions: the plain of Esdraelon and the Negev. The plain of Esdraelon, often associated prophetically with Armageddon, lies between Galilee and Samaria. This is one of the most fertile areas of Palestine and also was the scene of numerous battles. The plain was guarded by fortress cities on its southern side (Megiddo, Ibleam, and Taanach). In the OT the valley of Jezreel was not regarded as a part of Esdraelon but as the valley between the hill of Moreh and Mt Gilboa. At the eastern end was the stronghold of Beth-shan.<\/p>\n<p>In the extreme south of the land is the wilderness area called the Negev, or South Country. This begins in the region of Beersheba and extends roughly to Kadesh-barnea. A district of infrequent and irregular rainfall, its agriculture is restricted, although a nomadic pastoral life has been widely practiced there. <em>See<\/em> Arabah; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Dead Sea; Decapolis; Sea of Galilee; Jordan River; Negev; Shephelah; Transjordan.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PALESTINE*<\/h3>\n<p>Country on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea, also known as Canaan and Israel. Palestine was situated at the west end of the Fertile Crescent—that arching stretch of highly productive land that ran from the Persian Gulf through Mesopotamia and Syria to Egypt. Palestine lay in a unique position, for it constituted a land bridge between Mesopotamia and Egypt, the two primary cultural centers of the ancient Near East. It also served as a connection between the continents of Asia and Africa and as a continental link between Africa and Europe. Trade moved by well-defined routes as goods were brought into the Fertile Crescent from as far as northern Europe, India, and south of Egypt. The same roads were followed by prospective conquerors as they moved their armies from area to area in quest of power and wealth.<\/p>\n<p>It was the land promised by God to Abraham and his descendants, the homeland of God’s chosen people, and the geographical scene for much of biblical history. It has become a land sacred to three great world religions: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Physically, Palestine is a kind of microcosm. In a stretch of 150 miles (241.4 kilometers) one can find almost every kind of climate and terrain known on the earth. It has fertile plains, sandy deserts, rocky wastes, forests, mountains, lakes, and rivers. With such a variety in so small an area, the land provides sharp contrasts. In the north, Mt Hermon stands perpetually snowcapped at an altitude of about 9,100 feet (2,773.7 meters), while a scant 100 miles (160.9 kilometers) distant in the subtropical depression of the Jordan Valley is the Dead Sea, representing the deepest spot on the earth.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Name<\/p>\n<p>• Territory<\/p>\n<p>• Climate<\/p>\n<p>• Geography<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Name\">Name<\/p>\n<p>This land has been known by many names over its long history. The country seems to have been named after the maritime region, perhaps because this was the area that most foreigners contacted. So the land was called Canaan and later named after Philistia. In the table of nations, Canaan is said to have extended from Sidon in the north toward Gerar as far as Gaza and east toward the Cities of the Plain (Gn 10:19). The name Canaan appears in the Bible; the first occurrence of the name as that of a country or region is in Genesis 11:31.<\/p>\n<p>After the Israelite conquest of Canaan, the country was known as the land of Israel (1 Sm 13:19; 1 Chr 22:2). With the division of the kingdom in the reign of Rehoboam (930 <span>BC<\/span>), the name Israel went with the northern kingdom, and the southern kingdom was known as Judah (later, Judea).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Territory\">Territory<\/p>\n<p>The earliest reference to the extent of Palestine appears in the promise of the land to Abraham and to his descendants (Gn 15:18-21). Here the borders are given as the River of Egypt (Wadi el-Arish) in the southwest to the Euphrates River in the northeast. It is further defined in terms of the peoples who occupied it at that time, 10 in all, including the Kenites, the Kenizzites, the Kadmonites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites, and the Jebusites. In Genesis 17:8 the land is called simply “all the land of Canaan.”<\/p>\n<p>The Lord gave more detailed directions to Moses concerning the borders of the land that Israel was to occupy (Nm 34:1-12). The southern boundary was to be from the River of Egypt to the south of Kadesh-barnea and along the wilderness of Zin to the southern extremity of the Dead Sea. The western boundary was the Mediterranean, the northern border was set at the entrance to Hamath, and the eastern limit was the Jordan River and the Dead Sea.<\/p>\n<p>The greatest extent of the Promised Land is seen in the Lord’s declaration to Moses that he would set the bounds of Israel from the Red Sea to the Sea of the Philistines (Mediterranean) and from the wilderness to the Euphrates River (Ex 23:31). Historically, during the period of the judges and the reign of Saul, Israel did not conquer the land that had been given to the tribes in the division under Joshua. The military strength of David and the diplomacy of Solomon enabled them to achieve a marked expansion of Israelite rule. David defeated Hadadezer, king of Zobah, and thus pushed his northern frontier to the Euphrates River; he defeated Syria, Ammon, Moab, Edom, and Amalek, enlarging the kingdom also to the east and south (2 Sm 8:1-14; 1 Chr 18:1-13). Solomon had a fleet of merchant ships stationed at Ezion-geber on the Gulf of Aqaba. He also engaged in copper mining in that area.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Climate\">Climate<\/p>\n<p>It has been said that the climate of Palestine is more varied than that of any other area of comparable size in the world. Generally, the climate may be described as temperate; at Jerusalem, for example, the temperature extremes range from 26°F (-3.3°C) to 107°F (41.6°C), and the average annual rainfall is about 20 inches (50.8 centimeters). The coastal plain is warmer and has been compared to the east coast of Florida. The average annual temperature at Jaffa (Joppa) is 67° F (19.4°C). The Jordan Valley in the area of the Dead Sea is subtropical; in summer its temperatures may reach 120°F (48.8°C).<\/p>\n<p>Rainfall is seasonal, with rain coming in the cooler months of the year as the prevailing west wind brings moisture over the comparatively colder land area, much like the “lake effect” snows of the Great Lakes region of the United States. The rainy season extends from October to April. Within this time the Israelites singled out two periods (Jer 5:24; Jl 2:23), the former rain and the latter rain, with the former rain occurring in the months of October and November and the latter rain falling in March and April. The coastal area receives about 28 inches (71.1 centimeters) of rain annually, while the average for the country in general is 22 to 24 inches (55.9–70 centimeters).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>For purposes of description, the land of Palestine may be conveniently divided into five longitudinal sections:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Maritime or Coastal Plain<\/p>\n<li>2. The Shephelah<\/li>\n<li>3. The Western Plateau or Hill Country<\/li>\n<li>4. The Arabah or Jordan Valley<\/li>\n<li>5. The Eastern Plateau or Transjordan<\/li>\n<p>These divisions are based essentially on differences in elevation, but other geographic elements also serve to mark their limits or otherwise distinguish them.<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Maritime or Coastal Plain<\/h5>\n<p>The Maritime or Coastal Plain may be divided into three separate plains from south to north: the plain of Philistia, the plain of Sharon, and the plain of Acre.<\/p>\n<p>1. The plain of Philistia begins with the Wadi el-Arish, or River of Egypt, and extends north to the Nahr el-Auja, about five miles (8 kilometers) north of Joppa. This plain is about 70 miles (112.6 kilometers) long and reaches its greatest width in the latitude of Gaza, where it measures about 30 miles (48.3 kilometers). Along the Mediterranean there were dunes of sand, but for the most part, this area was very fertile and admirably suited for the production of grain.<\/p>\n<li>2. The plain of Sharon is not sharply demarcated from the Philistine plain and was probably under Philistine control, but the OT recognizes it as a separate entity (cf. Sg 2:1; Is 65:10). The plain extends north to Mt Carmel. On the coast are the town of Dor, which is mentioned in “The Tale of Wenamon,” and the city of Caesarea, where Herod the Great did much building.<\/li>\n<li>3. Beyond the promontory of Carmel lies a bay on which was situated the city named Ptolemais (Acts 21:7), also known as Acre or Acco (Jgs 1:31). Here a narrow plain stretches some 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) to the Ladder of Tyre (Ras en-Nakurah). The Kishon River (Jgs 4:7, 13; 1 Kgs 18:40) flows through this plain to the sea.<\/li>\n<h5>The Shephelah<\/h5>\n<p>The Shephelah constitutes a kind of “midlands,” intermediate between the lowlands of the coastal plain and the highlands of the Western Plateau, with an elevation of about 500 to 1,000 feet (152.4– 304.8 meters) and a width of only a few miles. It extends from the valley of Aijalon to Beersheba.<\/p>\n<p>The valleys of the Shephelah produced grain crops, while the hills were well suited for grapes and olives. The region was very important strategically, because it afforded approaches to Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<h5>The Western Plateau or Hill Country<\/h5>\n<p>The Western Plateau or Hill Country ranges from 1,000 to 4,000 feet (304.8–609.6 meters) in elevation and covers some 150 miles (241.4 kilometers) from Lebanon to Beersheba. It may also be divided into three areas: Galilee, Samaria, and Judea.<\/p>\n<p>1. Galilee may be regarded as two parts, Upper Galilee (2,000–4,000 feet, or 609.6–1,219.2 meters) and Lower Galilee (below 2,000 feet, or 609.6 meters). The area was agricultural and pastoral, like much of Palestine, and was open to invasion. The highways that traversed Galilee made it a cosmopolitan district, so that Isaiah 9:1 calls it “Galilee of the nations.”<\/p>\n<li>2. Samaria was also suitable for crops and pasture. The brothers of Joseph were grazing their flocks in the plain of Dothan when Joseph visited them and became the victim of their conspiracy (Gn 37:17).<\/li>\n<li>3. Judea has an elevation of about 2,000 to 3,500 feet (609.6–1,066.8 meters) and reaches some 60 miles (96.5 kilometers) from Bethel to Beersheba. The city of Jerusalem stands at an elevation of 2,654 feet (808.9 meters), surrounded by mountains and valleys that served as part of its defense system (Ps 125:2). This was the heart of the nation, for from the time of David onward, the capital was here, and more important, the ark of the covenant had been brought here during David’s reign. As the Lord had long foretold, Jerusalem had become the center of his worship; here Solomon built the temple, one of the greatest structures ever made.<\/li>\n<h5>The Arabah or Jordan Valley<\/h5>\n<p>The Arabah or Jordan Valley presents the extremes of height and depth. Mt Hermon rises to 9,166 feet (2,793.8 meters), while the surface of the Dead Sea lies 1,275 feet (395 meters) below sea level, and at its deepest part the sea plunges another 1,300 feet (396.2 meters).<\/p>\n<p>1. The North Arabah or Upper Jordan Valley. The Jordan River has four sources, all near Mt Hermon. The Jordan flows through what was Lake Huleh, now partly drained and designated as a wildlife refuge. Two miles (3.2 kilometers) below the Huleh basin is the Bridge of Jacob’s Daughters, by which the old road to Damascus crossed the river. The Jordan then flows into a gorge some 1,200 feet (365.8 meters) deep.<\/p>\n<li>2. The Sea of Galilee, about 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) from Huleh, has an elevation of -685 feet (-208.8 meters). It measures 15 by 8 miles (24.1 by 12.9 kilometers), with a maximum depth of 750 feet (228.6 meters). The shape of the lake gave it the OT name, Chinnereth, meaning “harp” (Nm 34:11; Jos 13:27). In the NT it was also called the Lake of Gennesaret (Lk 5:1) and the Sea of Tiberias (Jn 6:1; 21:1).<\/li>\n<li>3. The Middle Arabah, or Ghor. The name Jordan means “descender”; in the 60 miles or 96.5 kilometers (in a straight line) from the outlet of the Sea of Galilee to the northern end of the Dead Sea there is a fall of more than 600 feet (182.9 meters), or 10 feet per mile. The river flows in a series of S-curves or zigzags, so that its actual course between Galilee and the Dead Sea covers some 200 miles (321.8 kilometers).<\/li>\n<p>This stretch of the Jordan Valley is known as the Ghor, or Rift. Six miles (9.7 kilometers) below the Sea of Galilee the Yarmuk River enters from the east. Some smaller streams empty into the Jordan, but the next river of consequence is the Jabbok (Gn 32:22). Just south of the Sea of Galilee the Ghor is about four miles (6.4 kilometers) wide; near Beth-shan it reaches seven miles (11.3 kilometers) wide; beyond that for some 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) the mountains close in on the river on both sides, narrowing the valley to two to three miles (3.2 to 4.8 kilometers); near Jericho it broadens to about 12 miles (19.3 kilometers).<\/p>\n<li>4. The Dead Sea is unique. Its surface is the deepest point on the face of the earth and its waters are of tremendous wealth. In the OT it is known as the Salt Sea (Gn 14:3; Nm 34:12; Jos 12:3) and the Sea of Arabah (Jos 12:3). Josephus calls it Lake Asphaltitis.<\/li>\n<p>This body of water is 46 miles (74 kilometers) long, 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) wide, and 1,300 feet (396.2 meters) deep and consists of about 25 percent mineral matter, making it a chemical deposit of great value. In addition to the flow of the Jordan, the Dead Sea receives the water of other streams, such as the Arnon River on the east. Much of the runoff of the seasonal rains also finds its way into the Salt Sea. Temperatures in the valley may reach 120° F (48.8° C) in summer; with the extreme humidity the climate is very debilitating and almost unbearable. It is estimated that the daily evaporation from the sea is 6 to 8 million tons (5.4–7.3 million metric tons).<\/p>\n<li>5. The Southern Arabah, mostly a barren wilderness, extends from the Dead Sea to the Gulf of Aqaba, a distance of 150 miles (241.4 kilometers). There is a gradual ascent from the Dead Sea to a watershed just west of Petra. Near the tip of the Gulf of Aqaba were the ports of Elath (modern Eilat) and Ezion-geber.<\/li>\n<h5>The Eastern Plateau or Transjordan<\/h5>\n<p>The Eastern Plateau, or Transjordan, was not named as part of the land of promise, but it was taken by the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and half of Manasseh. The region is better supplied with water than the Western Plateau and has perennial streams, such as the Yarmuk, Jabbok, and Arnon. A principal north-south road was the King’s Highway, followed by the Israelites during the exodus (Nm 21:22) and probably also the route taken by the invading kings of Genesis 14.<\/p>\n<p>The northern section of Transjordan was known as Bashan, noted for its cattle (Ps 22:12; Ez 39:18) and for its oak trees (Is 2:13; Zec 11:2).<\/p>\n<p>Gilead, famed for its balm (Gn 37:25; Jer 8:22), was often mentioned in the OT (e.g., Dt 3:10-16; Jgs 11). It extended from the Yarmuk River to the city of Heshbon. This area was heavily forested in David’s time (cf. 2 Sm 18:8).<\/p>\n<p>In Palestine proper there were two important divisions: the plain of Esdraelon and the Negev. The plain of Esdraelon, often associated prophetically with Armageddon, lies between Galilee and Samaria. This is one of the most fertile areas of Palestine and also was the scene of numerous battles. The plain was guarded by fortress cities on its southern side (Megiddo, Ibleam, and Taanach). In the OT the valley of Jezreel was not regarded as a part of Esdraelon but as the valley between the hill of Moreh and Mt Gilboa. At the eastern end was the stronghold of Beth-shan.<\/p>\n<p>In the extreme south of the land is the wilderness area called the Negev, or South Country. This begins in the region of Beersheba and extends roughly to Kadesh-barnea. A district of infrequent and irregular rainfall, its agriculture is restricted, although a nomadic pastoral life has been widely practiced there. <em>See<\/em> Arabah; Conquest and Allotment of the Land; Dead Sea; Decapolis; Sea of Galilee; Jordan River; Negev; Shephelah; Transjordan.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PALESTINE* Country on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea, also known as Canaan and Israel. Palestine was situated at the west end of the Fertile Crescent—that arching stretch of highly productive land that ran from the Persian Gulf through Mesopotamia and Syria to Egypt. Palestine lay in a unique position, for it constituted a land bridge between Mesopotamia and Egypt, the two primary cultural centers of the ancient Near East. It also served as a connection between the continents of A...","summary_en":"PALESTINE* Country on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea, also known as Canaan and Israel. Palestine was situated at the west end of the Fertile Crescent—that arching stretch of highly productive land that ran from the Persian Gulf through Mesopotamia and Syria to Egypt. Palestine lay in a unique position, for it constituted a land bridge between Mesopotamia and Egypt, the two primary cultural centers of the ancient Near East. It also served as a connection between the continents of A...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34193,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sea of Galilee","title_en":"Sea of Galilee","content_ro":"<h3>SEA OF GALILEE<\/h3>\n<p>A large body of water in Palestine. It has had many names in its history. In the OT the Sea of Galilee was known as the Sea of Chinnereth or Kinnereth (Nm 34:11), named for the town (Jos 19:35), or as Chinneroth (12:3). Later, the name was changed to Lake of Gennesaret because the city of Gennesaret was located on the site of Chinnereth or Tell Ureime (Lk 5:1; 1 Macc 11:67). The most familiar name—the Sea of Galilee—was due to its connection with the province of Galilee to the west (Mt 4:18). It derived the name Sea of Tiberias (Jn 6:1, 23; 21:1) from the town of Tiberias on its southwestern shore. About <span>AD<\/span> 26 Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great, built the town near the warm springs of Hamath by the sea and named it for the emperor. In the Gospels “the sea” usually identifies the Sea of Galilee. Its modern Hebrew name is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yam Kinneret<\/span><em>.<\/em><\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Location\">Location<\/p>\n<p>The sea lies in the lower section of the Jordan Valley about 60 miles (96.5 kilometers) north of Jerusalem, located in a range of mountains. The mountains of Upper Galilee are northwest of the lake and rise to a height of 4,000 feet (1,219.2 meters) above sea level, while the mountains on the east and west ascend about 2,000 feet (609.6 meters). On the west, south, and east is the Decapolis.<\/p>\n<p>At the northwest corner of the lake the mountain wall flattens into the rich plain of Gennesaret, and on the east at 2,000 feet (609.6 meters) above sea level it gives way to the fertile El Batila in the northeast, where the Jordan enters the sea. At the time of the NT the Sea of Galilee was surrounded by the towns of Capernaum, Bethsaida, Korazin, Magdala, Tiberias, and others.<\/p>\n<p>The sea is an integral part of the Jordan River, which feeds it with water from the snowcapped Mt Hermon (towering over 9,000 feet, or 2,743.2 meters, above sea level) and the Lebanon mountains. In its 65-mile (104.6-kilometer) course from the Sea of Galilee to the Dead Sea, the Jordan River drops 590 feet (179.8 meters), an average of about nine feet per mile.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Description\">Description<\/p>\n<p>The lake is approximately 13 miles or 20.9 kilometers long and 6 miles or 9.7 kilometers wide (7½ miles or 12.1 kilometers at its broadest point opposite Magdala). It lies almost 700 feet (213.4 meters) below the Mediterranean Sea, and its greatest depth is 200 feet (60.9 meters). Its shape resembles a harp, and some scholars think the name Chinnereth comes from a Hebrew word meaning “harp.” The climate is semitropical. Because of this climate, combined with the sulphur springs at Tiberias, it became a resort to which sick people traveled. The lake abounds in fish, so fishing became an important industry (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:9-11). Sudden and violent storms (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25), caused by the collision of warm and cold air, occur regularly.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Importance\">Importance<\/p>\n<p>Most of the events of Jesus’ life took place in Galilee, especially around Gennesaret, the most densely populated area of Palestine. He is said to have lived at Capernaum (Mt 4:13), and he did many miracles there (11:23). Because the area on the west of the lake was a health resort, Jesus found many infirm people there and healed them (Mk 1:32-34; 6:53-56). Other important occurrences in relation to the sea were the Sermon on the Mount, traditionally near Capernaum (Mt 5:1ff.; cf. 8:1, 5); the drowning of the swine in the region of the Gadarenes (8:28-34); the curse on Korazin (11:21); the calming of the sea (8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-24); and Jesus’ walking on the water (Mt 14:22-23; Mk 6:45-51; Jn 6:16-21).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Galilee; Palestine.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SEA OF GALILEE<\/h3>\n<p>A large body of water in Palestine. It has had many names in its history. In the OT the Sea of Galilee was known as the Sea of Chinnereth or Kinnereth (Nm 34:11), named for the town (Jos 19:35), or as Chinneroth (12:3). Later, the name was changed to Lake of Gennesaret because the city of Gennesaret was located on the site of Chinnereth or Tell Ureime (Lk 5:1; 1 Macc 11:67). The most familiar name—the Sea of Galilee—was due to its connection with the province of Galilee to the west (Mt 4:18). It derived the name Sea of Tiberias (Jn 6:1, 23; 21:1) from the town of Tiberias on its southwestern shore. About <span>AD<\/span> 26 Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great, built the town near the warm springs of Hamath by the sea and named it for the emperor. In the Gospels “the sea” usually identifies the Sea of Galilee. Its modern Hebrew name is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yam Kinneret<\/span><em>.<\/em><\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Location\">Location<\/p>\n<p>The sea lies in the lower section of the Jordan Valley about 60 miles (96.5 kilometers) north of Jerusalem, located in a range of mountains. The mountains of Upper Galilee are northwest of the lake and rise to a height of 4,000 feet (1,219.2 meters) above sea level, while the mountains on the east and west ascend about 2,000 feet (609.6 meters). On the west, south, and east is the Decapolis.<\/p>\n<p>At the northwest corner of the lake the mountain wall flattens into the rich plain of Gennesaret, and on the east at 2,000 feet (609.6 meters) above sea level it gives way to the fertile El Batila in the northeast, where the Jordan enters the sea. At the time of the NT the Sea of Galilee was surrounded by the towns of Capernaum, Bethsaida, Korazin, Magdala, Tiberias, and others.<\/p>\n<p>The sea is an integral part of the Jordan River, which feeds it with water from the snowcapped Mt Hermon (towering over 9,000 feet, or 2,743.2 meters, above sea level) and the Lebanon mountains. In its 65-mile (104.6-kilometer) course from the Sea of Galilee to the Dead Sea, the Jordan River drops 590 feet (179.8 meters), an average of about nine feet per mile.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Description\">Description<\/p>\n<p>The lake is approximately 13 miles or 20.9 kilometers long and 6 miles or 9.7 kilometers wide (7½ miles or 12.1 kilometers at its broadest point opposite Magdala). It lies almost 700 feet (213.4 meters) below the Mediterranean Sea, and its greatest depth is 200 feet (60.9 meters). Its shape resembles a harp, and some scholars think the name Chinnereth comes from a Hebrew word meaning “harp.” The climate is semitropical. Because of this climate, combined with the sulphur springs at Tiberias, it became a resort to which sick people traveled. The lake abounds in fish, so fishing became an important industry (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:9-11). Sudden and violent storms (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25), caused by the collision of warm and cold air, occur regularly.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Importance\">Importance<\/p>\n<p>Most of the events of Jesus’ life took place in Galilee, especially around Gennesaret, the most densely populated area of Palestine. He is said to have lived at Capernaum (Mt 4:13), and he did many miracles there (11:23). Because the area on the west of the lake was a health resort, Jesus found many infirm people there and healed them (Mk 1:32-34; 6:53-56). Other important occurrences in relation to the sea were the Sermon on the Mount, traditionally near Capernaum (Mt 5:1ff.; cf. 8:1, 5); the drowning of the swine in the region of the Gadarenes (8:28-34); the curse on Korazin (11:21); the calming of the sea (8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-24); and Jesus’ walking on the water (Mt 14:22-23; Mk 6:45-51; Jn 6:16-21).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Galilee; Palestine.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SEA OF GALILEE A large body of water in Palestine. It has had many names in its history. In the OT the Sea of Galilee was known as the Sea of Chinnereth or Kinnereth (Nm 34:11), named for the town (Jos 19:35), or as Chinneroth (12:3). Later, the name was changed to Lake of Gennesaret because the city of Gennesaret was located on the site of Chinnereth or Tell Ureime (Lk 5:1; 1 Macc 11:67). The most familiar name—the Sea of Galilee—was due to its connection with the province of Galilee to the ...","summary_en":"SEA OF GALILEE A large body of water in Palestine. It has had many names in its history. In the OT the Sea of Galilee was known as the Sea of Chinnereth or Kinnereth (Nm 34:11), named for the town (Jos 19:35), or as Chinneroth (12:3). Later, the name was changed to Lake of Gennesaret because the city of Gennesaret was located on the site of Chinnereth or Tell Ureime (Lk 5:1; 1 Macc 11:67). The most familiar name—the Sea of Galilee—was due to its connection with the province of Galilee to the ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34217,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sea of Tiberias","title_en":"Sea of Tiberias","content_ro":"<h3>SEA OF TIBERIAS<\/h3>\n<p>Alternate name for the Sea of Galilee (Jn 6:1; 21:1). <em>See<\/em> Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SEA OF TIBERIAS<\/h3>\n<p>Alternate name for the Sea of Galilee (Jn 6:1; 21:1). <em>See<\/em> Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SEA OF TIBERIAS Alternate name for the Sea of Galilee (Jn 6:1; 21:1). See Sea of Galilee.","summary_en":"SEA OF TIBERIAS Alternate name for the Sea of Galilee (Jn 6:1; 21:1). See Sea of Galilee.","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":36224,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Spirit of Jesus Christ","title_en":"Spirit of Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>SPIRIT OF JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>The Spirit as identified with Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The most important development and element in earliest Christian understanding of the Spirit is that the Spirit is now the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Acts 16:7; Rom 8:9; Gal 4:6; Phil 1:19; 1 Pt 1:11; see also Jn 7:38; 15:26; 16:7; 19:30; Rv 3:1; 5:6). The Spirit is to be identified as the Spirit that bears witness to Jesus (Jn 15:26; 16:13-15; Acts 5:32; 1 Cor 12:3; 1 Jn 4:2; 5:7-8; Rv 19:10), but also, and more profoundly, as the Spirit that inspired and empowered Jesus himself. This Spirit became available to the believers after Christ’s resurrection.<\/p>\n<p> The apostles John and Paul were quite clear in their writings about Christ becoming spirit through resurrection. The keynote verses penned by John are John 6:63; 7:37-39; 14:16-18; 20:22; and 1 John 3:24; 4:13. The critical passages written by Paul are Romans 8:9-10; 1 Corinthians 15:45; 2 Corinthians 3:17-18; and 1 Corinthians 6:17.<\/p>\n<p>Revelation concerning the Spirit of Jesus is progressive in the Gospel of John. John does not tell us from the beginning that people could not actually receive eternal life until the hour of Christ’s glorification. Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life. But no one could really partake of these until after the Lord had risen. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive life via the Lord’s words because his words were themselves spirit and life (Jn 6:63); however, it was not until the Spirit would become available that believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life. After the Lord’s discourse in John 6, Jesus said, “It is the Spirit that gives life, the flesh profits nothing” (v 63). In the flesh Jesus could not give them the bread of life, but when the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “But this he spoke concerning the Spirit, for the Spirit was not yet because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for people to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by people; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat him or drink him until he became spirit, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples became regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “And hereby we know that he abides in us, by the Spirit whom he gave to us” (1 Jn 3:24), and again, “Hereby we know that we abide in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit” (4:13).<\/p>\n<p>The apostles had quite an adjustment to make after Christ’s resurrection. They had become so accustomed to his physical presence that it was difficult for them to learn how to live by his spiritual, indwelling presence. All through the 40 days after his resurrection, from the time the apostles received the inbreathing of the Spirit, Christ was teaching the disciples to make the transfer. He would physically appear and then disappear intermittently. His appearances were very frequent in the beginning and then they steadily diminished. His aim was to guide the apostles into knowing him in his invisible presence. However, this was so new to them that he had to keep appearing to them in order to strengthen and reassure them. But his real desire was to help them live by faith and not by sight. When he appeared to the disciples as they were all together the second time, with Thomas present, he chided Thomas for his unbelief. Then he prounounced this blessing, “Blessed are those who do not see me and yet believe” (Jn 20:29).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul was such a “blessed” one. He did not know Christ in the flesh. He knew only the risen Christ (2 Cor 5:15-16). In this regard, he had an advantage over the early apostles. They had a great adjustment to make, but from the very beginning, Paul knew the risen Christ as Spirit. Paul became the forerunner of all those Christians who have never seen Jesus in the flesh and who have come to experience him in the Spirit. Yes, Paul had seen the risen Lord; he was the last one to do so (1 Cor 15:8). And from that time onward he realized that Jesus was a glorified man, exalted far above all. Paul wrote much concerning this, but his writings did not leave the far-above-all Jesus far away because this was not what Paul experienced. Any experienced Christian should be able to testify that the Christ in the heavens is also the Christ in the heart.<\/p>\n<p>In his writings, Paul often speaks of the Spirit and Christ synonymously. This is evident in Romans 8:9-10. The terms “Spirit of God,” “Spirit of Christ,” and “Christ” are all used interchangeably. The Spirit of God is the Spirit of Christ, and the Spirit of Christ is Christ. In these verses, it is evident that Paul identified the Spirit with Christ because in Christian experience they are absolutely identical. There is no such thing as an experience of Christ apart from the Spirit. The separation and\/or distinction does exist in Trinitarian theology—and for very good reasons—but the separation is nearly nonexistent in actual experience. Several of Paul’s statements are written from the vantage point of experience.<\/p>\n<p>In 1 Corinthians 15:45, Paul says that the risen Jesus became life-giving spirit. Notice the verse does not say Jesus became the Spirit, as if the second person of the Trinity became the third, but that Jesus became spirit in the sense that his mortal existence and form were metamorphosed into a spiritual existence and form. Jesus’ person was not changed through the resurrection, only his form. With this changed spiritual form, Jesus regained the essential state of being he had emptied himself of in becoming a man. Before he became a man, he subsisted in the form of God (Phil 2:6), which form is Spirit and thereby was united to the Spirit (the third of the Trinity), while still remaining distinct. Thus, when the scripture says that the Lord “became life-giving spirit,” it does not mean that the Son became the Holy Spirit. But it does indicate that Christ, via resurrection, appropriated a new, spiritual form (while still retaining a body—a glorified one) that enabled him to commence a new spiritual existence (see 1 Pt 3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In 2 Corinthians 3, Paul explains that the NT ministry is a ministry carried out by the Spirit of the living God (v 3), who is the Spirit that gives life (v 6). In fact, the whole NT economy is characterized as “the ministry of the Spirit” (v 8). At the same time, Paul emphasizes that the function of the NT ministry is to bring God’s people to see and experience the glorious Christ (3:3, 14, 16-18; 4:4-6). It is in this context that Paul boldly declares, “The Lord is the Spirit” (3:17). He who turns his heart to the Lord is, in effect, turning his heart to the Spirit. lf the Lord were not the Spirit abiding in the believers, how could they turn their hearts to him? And how could they be transformed into the same image? Second Corinthians 3:18 says, “But we all, with unveiled face mirroring the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord-Spirit.” According to the Greek, the last phrase of this verse could be rendered “the Lord, the Spirit” (see <span>asv<\/span>) or “the Lord, who is the Spirit” (see <span>rsv<\/span>, <span>niv<\/span>) because the expression “the Spirit” is in direct apposition to “the Lord” (i.e., it is a further description of the Lord). Thus, the Lord is the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>In conclusion, when the Scriptures identify the Spirit with Christ and vice versa, the identification is not equivocation. Christ is not the Holy Spirit. Christ and the Spirit are distinct persons of the Trinity, as is affirmed by the overall teaching of the Word. But the Scriptures do identify Christ and the Spirit in the context of Christian experience. It would be accurate to say that Christians experience Christ through his Spirit, the Spirit of Christ. One cannot know Jesus apart from the Spirit or other than through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Resurrection.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SPIRIT OF JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>The Spirit as identified with Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The most important development and element in earliest Christian understanding of the Spirit is that the Spirit is now the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Acts 16:7; Rom 8:9; Gal 4:6; Phil 1:19; 1 Pt 1:11; see also Jn 7:38; 15:26; 16:7; 19:30; Rv 3:1; 5:6). The Spirit is to be identified as the Spirit that bears witness to Jesus (Jn 15:26; 16:13-15; Acts 5:32; 1 Cor 12:3; 1 Jn 4:2; 5:7-8; Rv 19:10), but also, and more profoundly, as the Spirit that inspired and empowered Jesus himself. This Spirit became available to the believers after Christ’s resurrection.<\/p>\n<p> The apostles John and Paul were quite clear in their writings about Christ becoming spirit through resurrection. The keynote verses penned by John are John 6:63; 7:37-39; 14:16-18; 20:22; and 1 John 3:24; 4:13. The critical passages written by Paul are Romans 8:9-10; 1 Corinthians 15:45; 2 Corinthians 3:17-18; and 1 Corinthians 6:17.<\/p>\n<p>Revelation concerning the Spirit of Jesus is progressive in the Gospel of John. John does not tell us from the beginning that people could not actually receive eternal life until the hour of Christ’s glorification. Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life. But no one could really partake of these until after the Lord had risen. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive life via the Lord’s words because his words were themselves spirit and life (Jn 6:63); however, it was not until the Spirit would become available that believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life. After the Lord’s discourse in John 6, Jesus said, “It is the Spirit that gives life, the flesh profits nothing” (v 63). In the flesh Jesus could not give them the bread of life, but when the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “But this he spoke concerning the Spirit, for the Spirit was not yet because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for people to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by people; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat him or drink him until he became spirit, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples became regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “And hereby we know that he abides in us, by the Spirit whom he gave to us” (1 Jn 3:24), and again, “Hereby we know that we abide in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit” (4:13).<\/p>\n<p>The apostles had quite an adjustment to make after Christ’s resurrection. They had become so accustomed to his physical presence that it was difficult for them to learn how to live by his spiritual, indwelling presence. All through the 40 days after his resurrection, from the time the apostles received the inbreathing of the Spirit, Christ was teaching the disciples to make the transfer. He would physically appear and then disappear intermittently. His appearances were very frequent in the beginning and then they steadily diminished. His aim was to guide the apostles into knowing him in his invisible presence. However, this was so new to them that he had to keep appearing to them in order to strengthen and reassure them. But his real desire was to help them live by faith and not by sight. When he appeared to the disciples as they were all together the second time, with Thomas present, he chided Thomas for his unbelief. Then he prounounced this blessing, “Blessed are those who do not see me and yet believe” (Jn 20:29).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul was such a “blessed” one. He did not know Christ in the flesh. He knew only the risen Christ (2 Cor 5:15-16). In this regard, he had an advantage over the early apostles. They had a great adjustment to make, but from the very beginning, Paul knew the risen Christ as Spirit. Paul became the forerunner of all those Christians who have never seen Jesus in the flesh and who have come to experience him in the Spirit. Yes, Paul had seen the risen Lord; he was the last one to do so (1 Cor 15:8). And from that time onward he realized that Jesus was a glorified man, exalted far above all. Paul wrote much concerning this, but his writings did not leave the far-above-all Jesus far away because this was not what Paul experienced. Any experienced Christian should be able to testify that the Christ in the heavens is also the Christ in the heart.<\/p>\n<p>In his writings, Paul often speaks of the Spirit and Christ synonymously. This is evident in Romans 8:9-10. The terms “Spirit of God,” “Spirit of Christ,” and “Christ” are all used interchangeably. The Spirit of God is the Spirit of Christ, and the Spirit of Christ is Christ. In these verses, it is evident that Paul identified the Spirit with Christ because in Christian experience they are absolutely identical. There is no such thing as an experience of Christ apart from the Spirit. The separation and\/or distinction does exist in Trinitarian theology—and for very good reasons—but the separation is nearly nonexistent in actual experience. Several of Paul’s statements are written from the vantage point of experience.<\/p>\n<p>In 1 Corinthians 15:45, Paul says that the risen Jesus became life-giving spirit. Notice the verse does not say Jesus became the Spirit, as if the second person of the Trinity became the third, but that Jesus became spirit in the sense that his mortal existence and form were metamorphosed into a spiritual existence and form. Jesus’ person was not changed through the resurrection, only his form. With this changed spiritual form, Jesus regained the essential state of being he had emptied himself of in becoming a man. Before he became a man, he subsisted in the form of God (Phil 2:6), which form is Spirit and thereby was united to the Spirit (the third of the Trinity), while still remaining distinct. Thus, when the scripture says that the Lord “became life-giving spirit,” it does not mean that the Son became the Holy Spirit. But it does indicate that Christ, via resurrection, appropriated a new, spiritual form (while still retaining a body—a glorified one) that enabled him to commence a new spiritual existence (see 1 Pt 3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In 2 Corinthians 3, Paul explains that the NT ministry is a ministry carried out by the Spirit of the living God (v 3), who is the Spirit that gives life (v 6). In fact, the whole NT economy is characterized as “the ministry of the Spirit” (v 8). At the same time, Paul emphasizes that the function of the NT ministry is to bring God’s people to see and experience the glorious Christ (3:3, 14, 16-18; 4:4-6). It is in this context that Paul boldly declares, “The Lord is the Spirit” (3:17). He who turns his heart to the Lord is, in effect, turning his heart to the Spirit. lf the Lord were not the Spirit abiding in the believers, how could they turn their hearts to him? And how could they be transformed into the same image? Second Corinthians 3:18 says, “But we all, with unveiled face mirroring the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord-Spirit.” According to the Greek, the last phrase of this verse could be rendered “the Lord, the Spirit” (see <span>asv<\/span>) or “the Lord, who is the Spirit” (see <span>rsv<\/span>, <span>niv<\/span>) because the expression “the Spirit” is in direct apposition to “the Lord” (i.e., it is a further description of the Lord). Thus, the Lord is the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>In conclusion, when the Scriptures identify the Spirit with Christ and vice versa, the identification is not equivocation. Christ is not the Holy Spirit. Christ and the Spirit are distinct persons of the Trinity, as is affirmed by the overall teaching of the Word. But the Scriptures do identify Christ and the Spirit in the context of Christian experience. It would be accurate to say that Christians experience Christ through his Spirit, the Spirit of Christ. One cannot know Jesus apart from the Spirit or other than through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Resurrection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SPIRIT OF JESUS CHRIST The Spirit as identified with Jesus Christ. The most important development and element in earliest Christian understanding of the Spirit is that the Spirit is now the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Acts 16:7; Rom 8:9; Gal 4:6; Phil 1:19; 1 Pt 1:11; see also Jn 7:38; 15:26; 16:7; 19:30; Rv 3:1; 5:6). The Spirit is to be identified as the Spirit that bears witness to Jesus (Jn 15:26; 16:13-15; Acts 5:32; 1 Cor 12:3; 1 Jn 4:2; 5:7-8; Rv 19:10), but also, and more profoundly, as t...","summary_en":"SPIRIT OF JESUS CHRIST The Spirit as identified with Jesus Christ. The most important development and element in earliest Christian understanding of the Spirit is that the Spirit is now the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Acts 16:7; Rom 8:9; Gal 4:6; Phil 1:19; 1 Pt 1:11; see also Jn 7:38; 15:26; 16:7; 19:30; Rv 3:1; 5:6). The Spirit is to be identified as the Spirit that bears witness to Jesus (Jn 15:26; 16:13-15; Acts 5:32; 1 Cor 12:3; 1 Jn 4:2; 5:7-8; Rv 19:10), but also, and more profoundly, as t...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37285,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Tiberias","title_en":"Tiberias","content_ro":"<h3>TIBERIAS<\/h3>\n<p>City midway along the western shores of Lake Galilee, built about <span>AD<\/span> 20 by Herod Antipas, Herod the Great’s son and the tetrarch of Galilee and Perea (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 39), who named the town in honor of the emperor Tiberius. The name is preserved in the modern town Tabariyeh. The site became his new capital after abandoning Sepphoris, which he built in 4 <span>BC<\/span>. The location of Tiberias had several advantages: it lay just below a rocky projection above the lake, a natural acropolis that offered good protection; it was a center where roads from north, south, and west met, allowing Herod to move readily to various parts of his domain; and a little to the south lay famous warm springs, which were known to the Roman writer Pliny the Elder, who spoke of their health-giving qualities. Herod built a lakeside palace, feeling secure in the knowledge that a naturally fortified acropolis lay behind him. From there he would have enjoyed a superb panorama, which took in the whole of Galilee at a glance.<\/p>\n<p>During the building of the town, a necropolis was discovered, which led to the Jewish abandonment of the site. The town was subsequently settled by a heterogeneous company of Gentiles, some of whom were brought forcibly to the place by Herod. By offering good houses and land to all, Herod assembled a sizable population (Josephus’s <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.2.3). According to the Gospels, Jesus never went there, probably in deference to Jewish scruples about the pollution caused by corpses. The town is mentioned only once in the NT (Jn 6:23), where boats came from Tiberias following the episode of the feeding of the 5,000. The Sea of Tiberias, that is, Lake Galilee, is referred to in John 6:1 and 21:1.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TIBERIAS<\/h3>\n<p>City midway along the western shores of Lake Galilee, built about <span>AD<\/span> 20 by Herod Antipas, Herod the Great’s son and the tetrarch of Galilee and Perea (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 39), who named the town in honor of the emperor Tiberius. The name is preserved in the modern town Tabariyeh. The site became his new capital after abandoning Sepphoris, which he built in 4 <span>BC<\/span>. The location of Tiberias had several advantages: it lay just below a rocky projection above the lake, a natural acropolis that offered good protection; it was a center where roads from north, south, and west met, allowing Herod to move readily to various parts of his domain; and a little to the south lay famous warm springs, which were known to the Roman writer Pliny the Elder, who spoke of their health-giving qualities. Herod built a lakeside palace, feeling secure in the knowledge that a naturally fortified acropolis lay behind him. From there he would have enjoyed a superb panorama, which took in the whole of Galilee at a glance.<\/p>\n<p>During the building of the town, a necropolis was discovered, which led to the Jewish abandonment of the site. The town was subsequently settled by a heterogeneous company of Gentiles, some of whom were brought forcibly to the place by Herod. By offering good houses and land to all, Herod assembled a sizable population (Josephus’s <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.2.3). According to the Gospels, Jesus never went there, probably in deference to Jewish scruples about the pollution caused by corpses. The town is mentioned only once in the NT (Jn 6:23), where boats came from Tiberias following the episode of the feeding of the 5,000. The Sea of Tiberias, that is, Lake Galilee, is referred to in John 6:1 and 21:1.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TIBERIAS City midway along the western shores of Lake Galilee, built about AD 20 by Herod Antipas, Herod the Great’s son and the tetrarch of Galilee and Perea (4 BC–AD 39), who named the town in honor of the emperor Tiberius. The name is preserved in the modern town Tabariyeh. The site became his new capital after abandoning Sepphoris, which he built in 4 BC. The location of Tiberias had several advantages: it lay just below a rocky projection above the lake, a natural acropolis that offered ...","summary_en":"TIBERIAS City midway along the western shores of Lake Galilee, built about AD 20 by Herod Antipas, Herod the Great’s son and the tetrarch of Galilee and Perea (4 BC–AD 39), who named the town in honor of the emperor Tiberius. The name is preserved in the modern town Tabariyeh. The site became his new capital after abandoning Sepphoris, which he built in 4 BC. The location of Tiberias had several advantages: it lay just below a rocky projection above the lake, a natural acropolis that offered ...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37287,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sea of Tiberias","title_en":"Sea of Tiberias","content_ro":"<h3>TIBERIAS, Sea of<\/h3>\n<p>Alternate name for the Sea of Galilee in John 6:1 and 21:1. <em>See<\/em> Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TIBERIAS, Sea of<\/h3>\n<p>Alternate name for the Sea of Galilee in John 6:1 and 21:1. <em>See<\/em> Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TIBERIAS, Sea of Alternate name for the Sea of Galilee in John 6:1 and 21:1. See Sea of Galilee.","summary_en":"TIBERIAS, Sea of Alternate name for the Sea of Galilee in John 6:1 and 21:1. See Sea of Galilee.","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56425,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:1-71<\/strong> Each story in this chapter uses the setting of the Passover Festival (6:4) to communicate a deeper meaning.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:1-71<\/strong> Each story in this chapter uses the setting of the Passover Festival (6:4) to communicate a deeper meaning.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:1-71 Each story in this chapter uses the setting of the Passover Festival (6:4) to communicate a deeper meaning.","summary_en":"6:1-71 Each story in this chapter uses the setting of the Passover Festival (6:4) to communicate a deeper meaning.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56426,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:1-15<\/strong> Jesus’ feeding the 5,000 recalls the great Old Testament miracle of bread when Israel was in the wilderness (Exod 16). The rabbis of Jesus’ day expected the coming Messiah to “rain down food from heaven” once again (Exod 16:4), and he did.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:1-15<\/strong> Jesus’ feeding the 5,000 recalls the great Old Testament miracle of bread when Israel was in the wilderness (Exod 16). The rabbis of Jesus’ day expected the coming Messiah to “rain down food from heaven” once again (Exod 16:4), and he did.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:1-15 Jesus’ feeding the 5,000 recalls the great Old Testament miracle of bread when Israel was in the wilderness (Exod 16). The rabbis of Jesus’ day expected the coming Messiah to “rain down food from heaven” once again (Exod 16:4), and he did.","summary_en":"6:1-15 Jesus’ feeding the 5,000 recalls the great Old Testament miracle of bread when Israel was in the wilderness (Exod 16). The rabbis of Jesus’ day expected the coming Messiah to “rain down food from heaven” once again (Exod 16:4), and he did.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84051,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:1-71<\/strong> Each story in this chapter uses the setting of the Passover Festival (6:4) to communicate a deeper meaning.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:1-71<\/strong> Each story in this chapter uses the setting of the Passover Festival (6:4) to communicate a deeper meaning.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:1-71 Each story in this chapter uses the setting of the Passover Festival (6:4) to communicate a deeper meaning.","summary_en":"6:1-71 Each story in this chapter uses the setting of the Passover Festival (6:4) to communicate a deeper meaning.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84052,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:1-15<\/strong> Jesus’ feeding the 5,000 recalls the great Old Testament miracle of bread when Israel was in the wilderness (Exod 16). The rabbis of Jesus’ day expected the coming Messiah to “rain down food from heaven” once again (Exod 16:4), and he did.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:1-15<\/strong> Jesus’ feeding the 5,000 recalls the great Old Testament miracle of bread when Israel was in the wilderness (Exod 16). The rabbis of Jesus’ day expected the coming Messiah to “rain down food from heaven” once again (Exod 16:4), and he did.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:1-15 Jesus’ feeding the 5,000 recalls the great Old Testament miracle of bread when Israel was in the wilderness (Exod 16). The rabbis of Jesus’ day expected the coming Messiah to “rain down food from heaven” once again (Exod 16:4), and he did.","summary_en":"6:1-15 Jesus’ feeding the 5,000 recalls the great Old Testament miracle of bread when Israel was in the wilderness (Exod 16). The rabbis of Jesus’ day expected the coming Messiah to “rain down food from heaven” once again (Exod 16:4), and he did.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111677,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:1-71<\/strong> Each story in this chapter uses the setting of the Passover Festival (6:4) to communicate a deeper meaning.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:1-71<\/strong> Each story in this chapter uses the setting of the Passover Festival (6:4) to communicate a deeper meaning.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:1-71 Each story in this chapter uses the setting of the Passover Festival (6:4) to communicate a deeper meaning.","summary_en":"6:1-71 Each story in this chapter uses the setting of the Passover Festival (6:4) to communicate a deeper meaning.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111678,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:1-15<\/strong> Jesus’ feeding the 5,000 recalls the great Old Testament miracle of bread when Israel was in the wilderness (Exod 16). The rabbis of Jesus’ day expected the coming Messiah to “rain down food from heaven” once again (Exod 16:4), and he did.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:1-15<\/strong> Jesus’ feeding the 5,000 recalls the great Old Testament miracle of bread when Israel was in the wilderness (Exod 16). The rabbis of Jesus’ day expected the coming Messiah to “rain down food from heaven” once again (Exod 16:4), and he did.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:1-15 Jesus’ feeding the 5,000 recalls the great Old Testament miracle of bread when Israel was in the wilderness (Exod 16). The rabbis of Jesus’ day expected the coming Messiah to “rain down food from heaven” once again (Exod 16:4), and he did.","summary_en":"6:1-15 Jesus’ feeding the 5,000 recalls the great Old Testament miracle of bread when Israel was in the wilderness (Exod 16). The rabbis of Jesus’ day expected the coming Messiah to “rain down food from heaven” once again (Exod 16:4), and he did.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139303,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:1-71<\/strong> Each story in this chapter uses the setting of the Passover Festival (6:4) to communicate a deeper meaning.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:1-71<\/strong> Each story in this chapter uses the setting of the Passover Festival (6:4) to communicate a deeper meaning.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:1-71 Each story in this chapter uses the setting of the Passover Festival (6:4) to communicate a deeper meaning.","summary_en":"6:1-71 Each story in this chapter uses the setting of the Passover Festival (6:4) to communicate a deeper meaning.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139304,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:1","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:1","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:1-15<\/strong> Jesus’ feeding the 5,000 recalls the great Old Testament miracle of bread when Israel was in the wilderness (Exod 16). The rabbis of Jesus’ day expected the coming Messiah to “rain down food from heaven” once again (Exod 16:4), and he did.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:1-15<\/strong> Jesus’ feeding the 5,000 recalls the great Old Testament miracle of bread when Israel was in the wilderness (Exod 16). The rabbis of Jesus’ day expected the coming Messiah to “rain down food from heaven” once again (Exod 16:4), and he did.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:1-15 Jesus’ feeding the 5,000 recalls the great Old Testament miracle of bread when Israel was in the wilderness (Exod 16). The rabbis of Jesus’ day expected the coming Messiah to “rain down food from heaven” once again (Exod 16:4), and he did.","summary_en":"6:1-15 Jesus’ feeding the 5,000 recalls the great Old Testament miracle of bread when Israel was in the wilderness (Exod 16). The rabbis of Jesus’ day expected the coming Messiah to “rain down food from heaven” once again (Exod 16:4), and he did.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60609,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65817,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88235,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93443,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115861,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121069,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143487,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148695,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":65840,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66376,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miracles","title_en":"Miracles","content_ro":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","summary_en":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93466,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94002,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miracles","title_en":"Miracles","content_ro":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","summary_en":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121092,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121628,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miracles","title_en":"Miracles","content_ro":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","summary_en":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148718,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149254,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miracles","title_en":"Miracles","content_ro":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","summary_en":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"4":[{"id":6485,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Bible* (New Testament), Chronology","title_en":"of the Bible* (New Testament), Chronology","content_ro":"<h3>CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (New Testament)<\/h3>\n<p>Branch of biblical studies that attempts to discover the sequence of NT events and the amount of time that elapsed between them. Chronology is essential to historians, whose task it is to determine the causes and effects of past events. Generally, for a historian’s purpose, assigning absolute dates is less important than knowing the sequence of events that may have influenced each other. Very few NT happenings, in fact, can be given exact dates.<\/p>\n\n<p>A remarkable testimony to the influence of Christianity is the fact that the entire Western world now divides history into <span>BC<\/span> (before Christ) and <span>AD<\/span> (<em>anno Domini,<\/em> “in the year of the Lord”). Before that method of dating became widespread in the Middle Ages, events were dated by their relation to other important events such as the founding of Rome or the beginning of a king’s reign. When a monk named Dionysius Exiguus (sixth century) invented our present method of dating, with the birth of Christ dividing history, he made a mistake in his computations. The odd result is the historical anomaly that Jesus himself was born no later than four years “before Christ.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChronologyofJesusLife\">Chronology of Jesus’ Life<\/p>\n<h5>Birth<\/h5>\n<p>According to Matthew 2:1 Jesus was born “in the days of Herod the king.” A first-century <span>AD<\/span> historian, Josephus, recorded that Herod died in the spring of the year we identify as 4 <span>BC<\/span>. Hence, Jesus was born sometime before that, but how much before is uncertain. Luke 2:1-2 records that Jesus’ birth occurred when “Caesar Augustus,” the Roman emperor, decreed that a census, or enrollment, should be taken throughout the nation. “This was the first census taken when Quirinius was governor of Syria” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Those statements raise two questions: When was such a census taken, and when was Quirinius governor of Syria? Neither question has received a completely satisfying answer.<\/p>\n<p>Census documents discovered in Egypt, together with earlier references, suggest that such enrollments were held every 14 years. That would put a census roughly in 8 or 9 <span>BC<\/span>. In view of the time needed to carry out the census (which required a person to travel to his birthplace), the birth of Jesus may have been somewhat later than the actual year of the decree (perhaps 7 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Josephus recorded that Quirinius became governor of Syria in <span>AD<\/span> 6, rather late as a date for Jesus’ birth. But some scholars have argued from ancient inscriptions that Quirinius also served in Syria as a special legate of the emperor Augustus before 6 <span>BC<\/span>. That could be the period referred to in Luke 2:2. Why did Luke choose to cite Quirinius instead of the regular governor of Syria at that time? Perhaps by so doing he could provide a more exact date for the birth of Jesus, since Quirinius was in authority for a shorter time than the regular governor of Syria.<\/p>\n<p>A reasonable conclusion is that Jesus was born about 7 or 6 <span>BC<\/span>. That fits with Matthew 2:16, which seems to say that Jesus was born at least two years before Herod’s death in 4 <span>BC<\/span>. No clear evidence exists concerning the day and month of his birth. Celebration of December 25 as Christmas originated in the fourth century, probably as a Christian alternative to the pagan winter solstice festival (Saturnalia).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginning of Public Ministry<\/h5>\n<p>Luke 3:23 says that Jesus, “when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age”; since the age given is only approximate, he may have been two or three years older or younger (cf. the pseudepigraphal Testament of Levi 2:2; 12:5). If exactly 30 is added to the suggested date of birth, one gets <span>AD<\/span> 24. That date cannot be right, because Jesus’ ministry began after John the Baptist appears; Luke 3:1-3 dates John’s public appearance precisely in “the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberias Caesar” while Pilate was procurator (governor) over Judea. Pilate governed from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, and the 15th year of Tiberius was most likely <span>AD<\/span> 27. Therefore Jesus did not begin his public ministry before <span>AD<\/span> 27. If only a short time elapsed between the beginning of John’s ministry and the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, then Jesus probably began in <span>AD<\/span> 27 or 28 when he was approximately 33 years old.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Death<\/h5>\n<p>All four Gospel records seem to imply that Jesus ate the Last Supper with his disciples on Thursday evening, was crucified on Friday, and rose from the dead early Sunday morning (Mt 28:1; Mk 16:1; Lk 24:1). The claim that Jesus rose on the third day (1 Cor 15:4) comes from the Jewish custom of counting a part of the day as a whole day. According to Matthew (26:19), Mark (14:12), and Luke (22:15), the Last Supper was the Passover meal, a yearly celebration of Israel’s escape from Egypt (Ex 12–15). But according to John 13:1 and 19:14, the Passover meal had not yet been eaten on Friday; hence the Last Supper in John was not the Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>No completely satisfying solution to the apparent discrepancy has been put forward. Some scholars suggest plausibly that the use of two different calendars was responsible. According to that theory, Jesus was following a calendar that placed the Passover meal on Thursday night. Temple officials, on the other hand, followed an alternate calendar that placed the killing of sacrificial victims on the next day. John may have used the second system to emphasize the fact that Christ was offered as the Passover sacrifice (cf. Jn 19:36; 1 Cor 5:7).<\/p>\n<p>To find out how long Jesus’ public ministry lasted and thus the year in which he died, one can turn to time references in John’s Gospel. John referred to at least three Passovers (2:13; 6:4; 13:1) and possibly four (5:1). Since the Passover was a yearly feast, the ministry of Jesus would have lasted at least two and possibly three years. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke the Friday of Jesus’ death occurred on the 15th of the Jewish month Nisan (which overlaps March and April). According to John, Jesus died on 14 Nisan. The question is: In which years from 26 to 36 (when Pilate was procurator in Judea) did 14 or 15 Nisan fall on a Friday? The answer is <span>AD<\/span> 27, 29, 30, and 33. Of those, the year 27 is too early and 33 is probably too late. Thus Jesus was probably crucified in 29 or 30, his public ministry lasted two or three years, and he was 35 or 36 years old when he died.<\/p>\n<h4>Events from <span>AD<\/span> 30 to 50<\/h4>\n<p>Acts is the only NT book that records how much time elapsed between Jesus’ death and his ascension: “To them he presented himself alive after his passion by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days, and speaking of the kingdom of God” (Acts 1:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). The next key event after the ascension of Jesus into heaven was Pentecost (Acts 2:1). Pentecost, the Greek word for “fiftieth,” referred to a celebration of the Feast of Weeks\/Harvest (cf. Ex 34:22; Dt 16:9-12) 50 days after the Passover. Since Jesus was crucified during the Passover season, the Pentecost of Acts 2:1, during which the disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit, took place in <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30, some 50 days after the Crucifixion and about 10 days after the Ascension.<\/p>\n<p>After that, events of the early chapters of Acts are hard to date because no precise statements are made about the amount of time between various events. Therefore, the usual method for dating events of the apostolic age is first to find at least one event that can be dated with relative certainty from sources outside the NT; one then dates events before and after that event by figuring out how much time elapsed between them. Sometimes Acts records how much time passed between two events; usually it does not, so dating can only be approximate.<\/p>\n<p>One pivotal starting point is the great famine prophesied by Agabus, which befell Palestine during the reign of the Roman emperor Claudius (Acts 11:28-29). Josephus, who was alive at the time, gives enough information to locate the famine sometime between the years 46 and 48. We also know from the Mishnah, a collection of Jewish laws, that the autumn of 47 to the autumn of 48 was a sabbatical year, when the Jews let the land rest and harvested nothing (cf. Lv 25:2-7). That could have aggravated and prolonged a famine, but one cannot be sure how early the famine started; some scholars propose 46 and some 47.<\/p>\n<p>At first, it seems peculiar that Luke, the author of Acts, should have recorded that famine (Acts 11:28) before recording the death of Herod Agrippa (12:20-23). From facts reported by Josephus, the death of Herod (a grandson of Herod the Great) can be dated in <span>AD<\/span> 44, probably in the spring. That means that Herod must have died several years before the famine Luke recorded earlier. Some scholars think that Luke simply got his chronological facts wrong. Others see Acts 12:1-24 as a kind of flashback to bring the history of the church in Jerusalem up to date. Such a practice was common among ancient historians, who often followed one source up to a suitable stopping point before moving on to another source. To charge Luke with inaccurate dating, it is argued, is to misunderstand the techniques of historical writing he was using.<\/p>\n<p>Since Herod Agrippa died in <span>AD<\/span> 44 (Acts 12:23), the apostle James, whom Herod put to death with the sword (v 2), must have died soon before 44, perhaps during the Passover season of 43 (v 3). The apostle Peter’s imprisonment and his miraculous escape (vv 3-17) also belong to that period.<\/p>\n<p>When the Christians of Antioch decided to send relief to the Christians in Jerusalem in the midst of the great famine (Acts 11:29), Barnabas and Paul were appointed to transport the money to Jerusalem. That was Paul’s second visit to Jerusalem after his conversion. The first visit is recorded in Acts 9:26-30. The third comes in Acts 15 when Paul and Barnabas were sent to discuss with the apostles and elders whether gentile converts to Christianity had to be circumcised. How one dates the first and third visits to Jerusalem, as well as Paul’s conversion, depends on how those Jerusalem visits are related to those reported in Paul’s letter to the Galatians.<\/p>\n<p>The basic problem, which still divides NT scholars, is this: In Galatians 1:15–2:10 Paul recounted that his conversion was followed by two visits to Jerusalem, one three years after his conversion (1:18) and one 14 years after that (2:1-10). All scholars agree that the first visit three years after his conversion is the same as the first visit recorded in Acts 9:26-30. Answers differ, however, to the question of whether Galatians 2:1-10 refers to the second (famine) visit to Jerusalem in Acts 11:30 (in which case the third visit of Acts 15 is the one omitted from Galatians) or whether Galatians 2:1-10 refers to the visit in Acts 15 (in which case the famine visit was the one omitted from Galatians).<\/p>\n\n<p>Those who favor the first reconstruction offer six arguments: (1) The reason Paul gave such a rigorous account of his comings and goings in Galatians 1:15-24 was to show that he did not get his gospel from men, nor was he taught it (1:12). In other words, his visits to the Jerusalem apostles were not for the purpose of receiving his gospel. If that is so, for Paul to omit the second Jerusalem visit would jeopardize his integrity and his authority with the Galatians. The first reconstruction avoids that difficulty; omission of a third Jerusalem visit from Galatians 2:1-10 could mean that it had not yet happened when Galatians was written. (2) Galatians 2:1-10 pictures a private meeting between Paul and Barnabas on one hand and the “pillar” apostles on the other. But the meeting in Acts 15 was public and before the whole church. Hence Galatians 2:1-10 more likely refers to a private meeting during the visit of Acts 11:30, which Galatians does not record. (3) Paul’s eagerness to give to the poor mentioned in Galatians 2:10 connects naturally with the second Jerusalem visit, when he was in fact delivering relief to the poor (Acts 11:30). (4) If Galatians 2 recorded the same trip as Acts 15, one would expect some mention of the decision reached by the Jerusalem Council, especially since that decision related directly to the problem of circumcision that Paul was handling in his Letter to the Galatians. (5) Further, it seems unlikely that the Jerusalem Council preceded the event of Galatians 2:11-21, when Peter was rebuked by Paul for withdrawing from fellowship with gentile believers; that incident could hardly have happened so soon after the issue of gentile status in the church had been settled in Jerusalem. (6) According to Galatians 1:6, the letter was written “quickly” after Paul had established the Galatian churches. That makes sense if Galatians was written soon after the first missionary journey, hence just before the Jerusalem Council of Acts 15; that would make Galatians Paul’s first letter.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars who favor the second reconstruction offer four arguments: (1) The main purpose of Paul’s visit in Galatians 2:1-10 appears to be the same as that in Acts 15:1-20; both dealt with the issue of whether circumcision should be required of gentile converts (Gal 2:3-5; Acts 15:1, 5). That similarity is obvious, but there is no such explicit similarity between Galatians 2 and Acts 11:30. (2) On the basis of form and content Galatians is similar to Romans and to 1 and 2 Corinthians; it would thus seem to come from the same period—considerably later than the Jerusalem Council. If so, it is likely that Paul would have included a reference to the Jerusalem Council (namely Gal 2:1-10) in his recollections, since its outcome supported his own stance on circumcision set forth in the letter. (3) Acts 11:30 pictures Barnabas as the leader of the Barnabas\/Paul team, since his name is given first place (as in Acts 12:25; 13:1-2, 7; cf. 11:25-26). But in the description Paul gives of the visit in Galatians 2, he sees himself as the leader of the team. Since Acts does picture Paul as the leader from the time of the first missionary journey (Acts 13:9, 13, 43, 46, 50), including the third Jerusalem visit (15:2), it is more likely that Galatians 2 records the trip of Acts 15. (4) Finally, in Galatians 2:7-8 Paul was recognized as an apostle to the Gentiles with a standing equal to that of Peter. But if Galatians 2 recorded the events of Acts 11:30 and the first missionary journey had not yet occurred, the “pillar” apostles could hardly have recognized Paul’s authority as apostle to the Gentiles. It is more likely that Galatians 2 followed the first missionary journey, just as Acts 15 followed the first missionary journey in Acts, and that both refer to the same event.<\/p>\n<p>The significance of those arguments for chronology is that, according to the first view, Paul’s conversion came 17 years before the famine visit of Acts 11:30 (cf. Gal 1:18; 2:1). According to the second view, Paul’s conversion took place 17 years before the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15. The difference amounts to only one year, however.<\/p>\n<p>It is helpful to consider one more date that can be fixed with high probability—namely, Paul’s arrival in Corinth on his second missionary journey (Acts 18:1). On the second missionary journey (15:40–18:22), Paul and Silas set out on land through Syria, Cilicia, Phrygia, and Galatia, visiting churches founded on the first missionary journey. They came to Troas, then passed over to Philippi and continued down the coast through Thessalonica and Berea. Paul went on to Athens before arriving at Corinth. From Acts 18:12 we know that Gallio was a proconsul in Corinth while Paul was there. An inscription discovered at nearby Delphi indicates that in all likelihood Gallio’s term of office was from mid-51 to mid-52. The incident recorded in Acts 18:12-17 probably occurred at the beginning of Gallio’s term, since the Jews hoped to get a ruling against Paul from their new proconsul. Not long after that, Paul left Corinth, probably in the summer or autumn of 52. According to Acts 18:11 Paul had spent 18 months in Corinth; that means that he probably arrived in the early months of 50 or the end of 49. That arrival date is confirmed by Acts 18:2, which says that Aquila and Priscilla had only recently been exiled from Rome when Paul came to Corinth. A fifth-century historian, Orosius, dated the edict of Claudius expelling the Jews from Rome in <span>AD<\/span> 49. Therefore, Paul and Aquila and Priscilla probably arrived close together late in 49 or early in 50. Early in his 18-month stay Paul wrote his First and Second Letters to the Thessalonians.<\/p>\n<p>The two fixed dates, then, are 46 or 47 for the famine visit (Acts 11:30) and late 49 or early 50 for Paul’s arrival in Corinth (Acts 18:1). Taking into account the time gaps mentioned in Galatians 1:18 and 2:1, as well as the supposition that the first missionary journey lasted about a year, the two reconstructions are presented in the following table. Keep in mind that they are approximations and that they reflect the ancient custom of counting a part of a year as a whole year.<\/p>\n\n<h4>Events from <span>AD<\/span> 50 to 70<\/h4>\n<p>Acts 24:27 describes an event that helps us date events in the rest of the book, namely, Porcius Festus’s replacement of Felix as the governor of Judea. A careful analysis of the evidence given by Eusebius, a fourth-century historian, leads to the probable conclusion that Felix was replaced in the summer of 59.<\/p>\n<p>Working backward from that date, Paul’s arrest in Jerusalem (Acts 21:33) must have occurred in 57, some two years before the coming of Festus. More precisely, Paul’s arrest probably occurred in the late spring or summer of 57; Paul’s goal (20:16) was to arrive in Jerusalem by Pentecost of that year, and Pentecost occurred at the end of May. He was not long in the city before he was arrested.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover festival, 50 days before Pentecost, was celebrated by Paul with the church in Philippi (Acts 20:6). That would have been April 7–14, <span>AD<\/span> 57. Only after the feast did he continue his hurried journey to Caesarea and Jerusalem (20:6–21:16). Before his Passover visit to Philippi, Paul had spent three months in Greece (20:3). Allowing some time for him to travel through Macedonia and visit the Thessalonians and Bereans, those three months were probably the winter months of 56–57 (Acts 20:3; cf. 1 Cor 16:6). No doubt they were spent in the main church of Greece, Corinth, and were used in part for the writing of the Letter to the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>Between Paul’s departure from Corinth on the second missionary journey (Acts 18:18) in the autumn of 51 and his arrival in Corinth on the third missionary journey (20:2) in the late winter of 56 are five years of activities that cannot be given exact dates. Paul said that he worked during three of those years in Ephesus (20:31; cf. 19:1–20:1). With enough time allowed for the travels before and after, that stay at Ephesus probably lasted from 52 or 53 to the summer of 55 or 56 (cf. 1 Cor 16:8). During his long stay in Ephesus, Paul wrote his First Letter to the Corinthians. Then, on his way to Corinth in 56, he wrote 2 Corinthians from Macedonia.<\/p>\n<p>Festus arrived as governor in the summer of 59, after Paul had been in prison in Caesarea for two years. Within a matter of days, Paul was tried before Festus (Acts 25:1-12). Not wanting to be remanded to the Jewish authorities, Paul appealed to Caesar (v 12), which meant that he would go to Rome. The account in Acts gives no hint of a delay, so the voyage most likely began in the summer or fall of 59 (27:2).<\/p>\n<p>Luke reported that when Paul the prisoner got to Fair Havens on the island of Crete, the weather had become dangerous for sea travel “because the fast had already gone by” (Acts 27:8-9). One ancient writer said that sailing became dangerous between mid-September and mid-November, and after that, impossible until spring. The fast referred to was no doubt the one in preparation for the Day of Atonement, which in the year 59 fell on October 5. It is not surprising that, 14 days after leaving Fair Havens, the ship in which Paul was traveling was wrecked on the coast of Malta, south of Sicily (vv 27-44). Three months later Paul set sail for Rome again in a ship that had spent the winter at Malta (28:11). Soon he was welcomed into Rome by Christians who came out to meet him (v 15). Thus Paul arrived in Rome in the early part of <span>AD<\/span> 60. The book of Acts closes with the remark that “For two whole years Paul stayed there in his own rented house” (v 30, <span>niv<\/span>). The NT does not report the outcome of his trial. During that period, according to the traditional view, he wrote Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon.<\/p>\n<p>Eusebius wrote, “Tradition has it that after defending himself the Apostle was again sent on the ministry of preaching, and coming a second time to the same city suffered martyrdom under Nero.” Nero, who was the Roman emperor from 54 to 68, put to death a multitude of Christians in Rome soon after a disastrous fire in July of 64, according to the Roman historian Tacitus. A number of early Christian writings (e.g., Clement) seem to indicate that Peter and Paul were both killed in Rome during that savage persecution. If so, and if Eusebius was right, then Paul may have spent the two years from 62 to 64 freely ministering back in the eastern provinces. Many conservative scholars date Paul’s First Letter to Timothy and his Letter to Titus from that period. Written from Rome shortly before Paul’s martyrdom in 64, 2 Timothy was probably his last letter (2 Tm 2:9; 4:6).<\/p>\n<p>In Jerusalem, within three years after Paul had been carried off to Rome, James the brother of Jesus was stoned to death by the Jewish authorities. According to Josephus, that occurred in 62. Not long afterward, according to Eusebius, the church in Jerusalem received a prophecy warning them to leave that doomed city and settle in Pella, one of the cities of the Decapolis (“ten cities”) east of the Jordan. Thus when war broke out between the Jews and the Romans in 66, the Christians for the most part escaped its fury. That war ended in 70 with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (cf. Mk 13:2; Lk 21:24).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Acts of the Apostles, Book of the; Apostle, Apostleship; Age; “Date” under each NT book; First Jewish Revolt; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Paul, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (New Testament)<\/h3>\n<p>Branch of biblical studies that attempts to discover the sequence of NT events and the amount of time that elapsed between them. Chronology is essential to historians, whose task it is to determine the causes and effects of past events. Generally, for a historian’s purpose, assigning absolute dates is less important than knowing the sequence of events that may have influenced each other. Very few NT happenings, in fact, can be given exact dates.<\/p>\n\n<p>A remarkable testimony to the influence of Christianity is the fact that the entire Western world now divides history into <span>BC<\/span> (before Christ) and <span>AD<\/span> (<em>anno Domini,<\/em> “in the year of the Lord”). Before that method of dating became widespread in the Middle Ages, events were dated by their relation to other important events such as the founding of Rome or the beginning of a king’s reign. When a monk named Dionysius Exiguus (sixth century) invented our present method of dating, with the birth of Christ dividing history, he made a mistake in his computations. The odd result is the historical anomaly that Jesus himself was born no later than four years “before Christ.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChronologyofJesusLife\">Chronology of Jesus’ Life<\/p>\n<h5>Birth<\/h5>\n<p>According to Matthew 2:1 Jesus was born “in the days of Herod the king.” A first-century <span>AD<\/span> historian, Josephus, recorded that Herod died in the spring of the year we identify as 4 <span>BC<\/span>. Hence, Jesus was born sometime before that, but how much before is uncertain. Luke 2:1-2 records that Jesus’ birth occurred when “Caesar Augustus,” the Roman emperor, decreed that a census, or enrollment, should be taken throughout the nation. “This was the first census taken when Quirinius was governor of Syria” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Those statements raise two questions: When was such a census taken, and when was Quirinius governor of Syria? Neither question has received a completely satisfying answer.<\/p>\n<p>Census documents discovered in Egypt, together with earlier references, suggest that such enrollments were held every 14 years. That would put a census roughly in 8 or 9 <span>BC<\/span>. In view of the time needed to carry out the census (which required a person to travel to his birthplace), the birth of Jesus may have been somewhat later than the actual year of the decree (perhaps 7 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Josephus recorded that Quirinius became governor of Syria in <span>AD<\/span> 6, rather late as a date for Jesus’ birth. But some scholars have argued from ancient inscriptions that Quirinius also served in Syria as a special legate of the emperor Augustus before 6 <span>BC<\/span>. That could be the period referred to in Luke 2:2. Why did Luke choose to cite Quirinius instead of the regular governor of Syria at that time? Perhaps by so doing he could provide a more exact date for the birth of Jesus, since Quirinius was in authority for a shorter time than the regular governor of Syria.<\/p>\n<p>A reasonable conclusion is that Jesus was born about 7 or 6 <span>BC<\/span>. That fits with Matthew 2:16, which seems to say that Jesus was born at least two years before Herod’s death in 4 <span>BC<\/span>. No clear evidence exists concerning the day and month of his birth. Celebration of December 25 as Christmas originated in the fourth century, probably as a Christian alternative to the pagan winter solstice festival (Saturnalia).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginning of Public Ministry<\/h5>\n<p>Luke 3:23 says that Jesus, “when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age”; since the age given is only approximate, he may have been two or three years older or younger (cf. the pseudepigraphal Testament of Levi 2:2; 12:5). If exactly 30 is added to the suggested date of birth, one gets <span>AD<\/span> 24. That date cannot be right, because Jesus’ ministry began after John the Baptist appears; Luke 3:1-3 dates John’s public appearance precisely in “the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberias Caesar” while Pilate was procurator (governor) over Judea. Pilate governed from <span>AD<\/span> 26 to 36, and the 15th year of Tiberius was most likely <span>AD<\/span> 27. Therefore Jesus did not begin his public ministry before <span>AD<\/span> 27. If only a short time elapsed between the beginning of John’s ministry and the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, then Jesus probably began in <span>AD<\/span> 27 or 28 when he was approximately 33 years old.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Death<\/h5>\n<p>All four Gospel records seem to imply that Jesus ate the Last Supper with his disciples on Thursday evening, was crucified on Friday, and rose from the dead early Sunday morning (Mt 28:1; Mk 16:1; Lk 24:1). The claim that Jesus rose on the third day (1 Cor 15:4) comes from the Jewish custom of counting a part of the day as a whole day. According to Matthew (26:19), Mark (14:12), and Luke (22:15), the Last Supper was the Passover meal, a yearly celebration of Israel’s escape from Egypt (Ex 12–15). But according to John 13:1 and 19:14, the Passover meal had not yet been eaten on Friday; hence the Last Supper in John was not the Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>No completely satisfying solution to the apparent discrepancy has been put forward. Some scholars suggest plausibly that the use of two different calendars was responsible. According to that theory, Jesus was following a calendar that placed the Passover meal on Thursday night. Temple officials, on the other hand, followed an alternate calendar that placed the killing of sacrificial victims on the next day. John may have used the second system to emphasize the fact that Christ was offered as the Passover sacrifice (cf. Jn 19:36; 1 Cor 5:7).<\/p>\n<p>To find out how long Jesus’ public ministry lasted and thus the year in which he died, one can turn to time references in John’s Gospel. John referred to at least three Passovers (2:13; 6:4; 13:1) and possibly four (5:1). Since the Passover was a yearly feast, the ministry of Jesus would have lasted at least two and possibly three years. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke the Friday of Jesus’ death occurred on the 15th of the Jewish month Nisan (which overlaps March and April). According to John, Jesus died on 14 Nisan. The question is: In which years from 26 to 36 (when Pilate was procurator in Judea) did 14 or 15 Nisan fall on a Friday? The answer is <span>AD<\/span> 27, 29, 30, and 33. Of those, the year 27 is too early and 33 is probably too late. Thus Jesus was probably crucified in 29 or 30, his public ministry lasted two or three years, and he was 35 or 36 years old when he died.<\/p>\n<h4>Events from <span>AD<\/span> 30 to 50<\/h4>\n<p>Acts is the only NT book that records how much time elapsed between Jesus’ death and his ascension: “To them he presented himself alive after his passion by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days, and speaking of the kingdom of God” (Acts 1:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). The next key event after the ascension of Jesus into heaven was Pentecost (Acts 2:1). Pentecost, the Greek word for “fiftieth,” referred to a celebration of the Feast of Weeks\/Harvest (cf. Ex 34:22; Dt 16:9-12) 50 days after the Passover. Since Jesus was crucified during the Passover season, the Pentecost of Acts 2:1, during which the disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit, took place in <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30, some 50 days after the Crucifixion and about 10 days after the Ascension.<\/p>\n<p>After that, events of the early chapters of Acts are hard to date because no precise statements are made about the amount of time between various events. Therefore, the usual method for dating events of the apostolic age is first to find at least one event that can be dated with relative certainty from sources outside the NT; one then dates events before and after that event by figuring out how much time elapsed between them. Sometimes Acts records how much time passed between two events; usually it does not, so dating can only be approximate.<\/p>\n<p>One pivotal starting point is the great famine prophesied by Agabus, which befell Palestine during the reign of the Roman emperor Claudius (Acts 11:28-29). Josephus, who was alive at the time, gives enough information to locate the famine sometime between the years 46 and 48. We also know from the Mishnah, a collection of Jewish laws, that the autumn of 47 to the autumn of 48 was a sabbatical year, when the Jews let the land rest and harvested nothing (cf. Lv 25:2-7). That could have aggravated and prolonged a famine, but one cannot be sure how early the famine started; some scholars propose 46 and some 47.<\/p>\n<p>At first, it seems peculiar that Luke, the author of Acts, should have recorded that famine (Acts 11:28) before recording the death of Herod Agrippa (12:20-23). From facts reported by Josephus, the death of Herod (a grandson of Herod the Great) can be dated in <span>AD<\/span> 44, probably in the spring. That means that Herod must have died several years before the famine Luke recorded earlier. Some scholars think that Luke simply got his chronological facts wrong. Others see Acts 12:1-24 as a kind of flashback to bring the history of the church in Jerusalem up to date. Such a practice was common among ancient historians, who often followed one source up to a suitable stopping point before moving on to another source. To charge Luke with inaccurate dating, it is argued, is to misunderstand the techniques of historical writing he was using.<\/p>\n<p>Since Herod Agrippa died in <span>AD<\/span> 44 (Acts 12:23), the apostle James, whom Herod put to death with the sword (v 2), must have died soon before 44, perhaps during the Passover season of 43 (v 3). The apostle Peter’s imprisonment and his miraculous escape (vv 3-17) also belong to that period.<\/p>\n<p>When the Christians of Antioch decided to send relief to the Christians in Jerusalem in the midst of the great famine (Acts 11:29), Barnabas and Paul were appointed to transport the money to Jerusalem. That was Paul’s second visit to Jerusalem after his conversion. The first visit is recorded in Acts 9:26-30. The third comes in Acts 15 when Paul and Barnabas were sent to discuss with the apostles and elders whether gentile converts to Christianity had to be circumcised. How one dates the first and third visits to Jerusalem, as well as Paul’s conversion, depends on how those Jerusalem visits are related to those reported in Paul’s letter to the Galatians.<\/p>\n<p>The basic problem, which still divides NT scholars, is this: In Galatians 1:15–2:10 Paul recounted that his conversion was followed by two visits to Jerusalem, one three years after his conversion (1:18) and one 14 years after that (2:1-10). All scholars agree that the first visit three years after his conversion is the same as the first visit recorded in Acts 9:26-30. Answers differ, however, to the question of whether Galatians 2:1-10 refers to the second (famine) visit to Jerusalem in Acts 11:30 (in which case the third visit of Acts 15 is the one omitted from Galatians) or whether Galatians 2:1-10 refers to the visit in Acts 15 (in which case the famine visit was the one omitted from Galatians).<\/p>\n\n<p>Those who favor the first reconstruction offer six arguments: (1) The reason Paul gave such a rigorous account of his comings and goings in Galatians 1:15-24 was to show that he did not get his gospel from men, nor was he taught it (1:12). In other words, his visits to the Jerusalem apostles were not for the purpose of receiving his gospel. If that is so, for Paul to omit the second Jerusalem visit would jeopardize his integrity and his authority with the Galatians. The first reconstruction avoids that difficulty; omission of a third Jerusalem visit from Galatians 2:1-10 could mean that it had not yet happened when Galatians was written. (2) Galatians 2:1-10 pictures a private meeting between Paul and Barnabas on one hand and the “pillar” apostles on the other. But the meeting in Acts 15 was public and before the whole church. Hence Galatians 2:1-10 more likely refers to a private meeting during the visit of Acts 11:30, which Galatians does not record. (3) Paul’s eagerness to give to the poor mentioned in Galatians 2:10 connects naturally with the second Jerusalem visit, when he was in fact delivering relief to the poor (Acts 11:30). (4) If Galatians 2 recorded the same trip as Acts 15, one would expect some mention of the decision reached by the Jerusalem Council, especially since that decision related directly to the problem of circumcision that Paul was handling in his Letter to the Galatians. (5) Further, it seems unlikely that the Jerusalem Council preceded the event of Galatians 2:11-21, when Peter was rebuked by Paul for withdrawing from fellowship with gentile believers; that incident could hardly have happened so soon after the issue of gentile status in the church had been settled in Jerusalem. (6) According to Galatians 1:6, the letter was written “quickly” after Paul had established the Galatian churches. That makes sense if Galatians was written soon after the first missionary journey, hence just before the Jerusalem Council of Acts 15; that would make Galatians Paul’s first letter.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars who favor the second reconstruction offer four arguments: (1) The main purpose of Paul’s visit in Galatians 2:1-10 appears to be the same as that in Acts 15:1-20; both dealt with the issue of whether circumcision should be required of gentile converts (Gal 2:3-5; Acts 15:1, 5). That similarity is obvious, but there is no such explicit similarity between Galatians 2 and Acts 11:30. (2) On the basis of form and content Galatians is similar to Romans and to 1 and 2 Corinthians; it would thus seem to come from the same period—considerably later than the Jerusalem Council. If so, it is likely that Paul would have included a reference to the Jerusalem Council (namely Gal 2:1-10) in his recollections, since its outcome supported his own stance on circumcision set forth in the letter. (3) Acts 11:30 pictures Barnabas as the leader of the Barnabas\/Paul team, since his name is given first place (as in Acts 12:25; 13:1-2, 7; cf. 11:25-26). But in the description Paul gives of the visit in Galatians 2, he sees himself as the leader of the team. Since Acts does picture Paul as the leader from the time of the first missionary journey (Acts 13:9, 13, 43, 46, 50), including the third Jerusalem visit (15:2), it is more likely that Galatians 2 records the trip of Acts 15. (4) Finally, in Galatians 2:7-8 Paul was recognized as an apostle to the Gentiles with a standing equal to that of Peter. But if Galatians 2 recorded the events of Acts 11:30 and the first missionary journey had not yet occurred, the “pillar” apostles could hardly have recognized Paul’s authority as apostle to the Gentiles. It is more likely that Galatians 2 followed the first missionary journey, just as Acts 15 followed the first missionary journey in Acts, and that both refer to the same event.<\/p>\n<p>The significance of those arguments for chronology is that, according to the first view, Paul’s conversion came 17 years before the famine visit of Acts 11:30 (cf. Gal 1:18; 2:1). According to the second view, Paul’s conversion took place 17 years before the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15. The difference amounts to only one year, however.<\/p>\n<p>It is helpful to consider one more date that can be fixed with high probability—namely, Paul’s arrival in Corinth on his second missionary journey (Acts 18:1). On the second missionary journey (15:40–18:22), Paul and Silas set out on land through Syria, Cilicia, Phrygia, and Galatia, visiting churches founded on the first missionary journey. They came to Troas, then passed over to Philippi and continued down the coast through Thessalonica and Berea. Paul went on to Athens before arriving at Corinth. From Acts 18:12 we know that Gallio was a proconsul in Corinth while Paul was there. An inscription discovered at nearby Delphi indicates that in all likelihood Gallio’s term of office was from mid-51 to mid-52. The incident recorded in Acts 18:12-17 probably occurred at the beginning of Gallio’s term, since the Jews hoped to get a ruling against Paul from their new proconsul. Not long after that, Paul left Corinth, probably in the summer or autumn of 52. According to Acts 18:11 Paul had spent 18 months in Corinth; that means that he probably arrived in the early months of 50 or the end of 49. That arrival date is confirmed by Acts 18:2, which says that Aquila and Priscilla had only recently been exiled from Rome when Paul came to Corinth. A fifth-century historian, Orosius, dated the edict of Claudius expelling the Jews from Rome in <span>AD<\/span> 49. Therefore, Paul and Aquila and Priscilla probably arrived close together late in 49 or early in 50. Early in his 18-month stay Paul wrote his First and Second Letters to the Thessalonians.<\/p>\n<p>The two fixed dates, then, are 46 or 47 for the famine visit (Acts 11:30) and late 49 or early 50 for Paul’s arrival in Corinth (Acts 18:1). Taking into account the time gaps mentioned in Galatians 1:18 and 2:1, as well as the supposition that the first missionary journey lasted about a year, the two reconstructions are presented in the following table. Keep in mind that they are approximations and that they reflect the ancient custom of counting a part of a year as a whole year.<\/p>\n\n<h4>Events from <span>AD<\/span> 50 to 70<\/h4>\n<p>Acts 24:27 describes an event that helps us date events in the rest of the book, namely, Porcius Festus’s replacement of Felix as the governor of Judea. A careful analysis of the evidence given by Eusebius, a fourth-century historian, leads to the probable conclusion that Felix was replaced in the summer of 59.<\/p>\n<p>Working backward from that date, Paul’s arrest in Jerusalem (Acts 21:33) must have occurred in 57, some two years before the coming of Festus. More precisely, Paul’s arrest probably occurred in the late spring or summer of 57; Paul’s goal (20:16) was to arrive in Jerusalem by Pentecost of that year, and Pentecost occurred at the end of May. He was not long in the city before he was arrested.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover festival, 50 days before Pentecost, was celebrated by Paul with the church in Philippi (Acts 20:6). That would have been April 7–14, <span>AD<\/span> 57. Only after the feast did he continue his hurried journey to Caesarea and Jerusalem (20:6–21:16). Before his Passover visit to Philippi, Paul had spent three months in Greece (20:3). Allowing some time for him to travel through Macedonia and visit the Thessalonians and Bereans, those three months were probably the winter months of 56–57 (Acts 20:3; cf. 1 Cor 16:6). No doubt they were spent in the main church of Greece, Corinth, and were used in part for the writing of the Letter to the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>Between Paul’s departure from Corinth on the second missionary journey (Acts 18:18) in the autumn of 51 and his arrival in Corinth on the third missionary journey (20:2) in the late winter of 56 are five years of activities that cannot be given exact dates. Paul said that he worked during three of those years in Ephesus (20:31; cf. 19:1–20:1). With enough time allowed for the travels before and after, that stay at Ephesus probably lasted from 52 or 53 to the summer of 55 or 56 (cf. 1 Cor 16:8). During his long stay in Ephesus, Paul wrote his First Letter to the Corinthians. Then, on his way to Corinth in 56, he wrote 2 Corinthians from Macedonia.<\/p>\n<p>Festus arrived as governor in the summer of 59, after Paul had been in prison in Caesarea for two years. Within a matter of days, Paul was tried before Festus (Acts 25:1-12). Not wanting to be remanded to the Jewish authorities, Paul appealed to Caesar (v 12), which meant that he would go to Rome. The account in Acts gives no hint of a delay, so the voyage most likely began in the summer or fall of 59 (27:2).<\/p>\n<p>Luke reported that when Paul the prisoner got to Fair Havens on the island of Crete, the weather had become dangerous for sea travel “because the fast had already gone by” (Acts 27:8-9). One ancient writer said that sailing became dangerous between mid-September and mid-November, and after that, impossible until spring. The fast referred to was no doubt the one in preparation for the Day of Atonement, which in the year 59 fell on October 5. It is not surprising that, 14 days after leaving Fair Havens, the ship in which Paul was traveling was wrecked on the coast of Malta, south of Sicily (vv 27-44). Three months later Paul set sail for Rome again in a ship that had spent the winter at Malta (28:11). Soon he was welcomed into Rome by Christians who came out to meet him (v 15). Thus Paul arrived in Rome in the early part of <span>AD<\/span> 60. The book of Acts closes with the remark that “For two whole years Paul stayed there in his own rented house” (v 30, <span>niv<\/span>). The NT does not report the outcome of his trial. During that period, according to the traditional view, he wrote Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon.<\/p>\n<p>Eusebius wrote, “Tradition has it that after defending himself the Apostle was again sent on the ministry of preaching, and coming a second time to the same city suffered martyrdom under Nero.” Nero, who was the Roman emperor from 54 to 68, put to death a multitude of Christians in Rome soon after a disastrous fire in July of 64, according to the Roman historian Tacitus. A number of early Christian writings (e.g., Clement) seem to indicate that Peter and Paul were both killed in Rome during that savage persecution. If so, and if Eusebius was right, then Paul may have spent the two years from 62 to 64 freely ministering back in the eastern provinces. Many conservative scholars date Paul’s First Letter to Timothy and his Letter to Titus from that period. Written from Rome shortly before Paul’s martyrdom in 64, 2 Timothy was probably his last letter (2 Tm 2:9; 4:6).<\/p>\n<p>In Jerusalem, within three years after Paul had been carried off to Rome, James the brother of Jesus was stoned to death by the Jewish authorities. According to Josephus, that occurred in 62. Not long afterward, according to Eusebius, the church in Jerusalem received a prophecy warning them to leave that doomed city and settle in Pella, one of the cities of the Decapolis (“ten cities”) east of the Jordan. Thus when war broke out between the Jews and the Romans in 66, the Christians for the most part escaped its fury. That war ended in 70 with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (cf. Mk 13:2; Lk 21:24).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Acts of the Apostles, Book of the; Apostle, Apostleship; Age; “Date” under each NT book; First Jewish Revolt; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Paul, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (New Testament) Branch of biblical studies that attempts to discover the sequence of NT events and the amount of time that elapsed between them. Chronology is essential to historians, whose task it is to determine the causes and effects of past events. Generally, for a historian’s purpose, assigning absolute dates is less important than knowing the sequence of events that may have influenced each other. Very few NT happenings, in fact, can be given exact dates. A rema...","summary_en":"CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (New Testament) Branch of biblical studies that attempts to discover the sequence of NT events and the amount of time that elapsed between them. Chronology is essential to historians, whose task it is to determine the causes and effects of past events. Generally, for a historian’s purpose, assigning absolute dates is less important than knowing the sequence of events that may have influenced each other. Very few NT happenings, in fact, can be given exact dates. A rema...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":12210,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Feasts and Festivals of Israel","title_en":"Feasts and Festivals of Israel","content_ro":"<h3>FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion.<\/p>\n\n<p>In contemporary usage “festival” usually refers to activities extending over a period of time, while “feast” indicates one part of the celebration, often a meal. However, in religious usage, both ancient and modern, the two words are used interchangeably. The ancient Hebrews employed the words <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mo’ed<\/span> (“seasons”) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span> for their great public celebrations, while feasts of a more private nature were commonly described by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishteh<\/span><em>.<\/em> The majority of English translations of Scripture do not differentiate between these words.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FeastsandTheirFunctions\">Feasts and Their Functions<\/p>\n<p>Each festival places great emphasis on community participation and on the continuity of social or religious tradition, especially where the celebrations are elements of a regular civil or religious calendar. Without community backing, even in a family celebration, no festival can be successful. When there is communal participation, a festival can reinforce the individual and community memory of specific occasions, and can perpetuate that store of recollection over years and generations. Such shared memory has a cohesive effect upon a cooperating community, large or small, and serves to establish the traditions by which the group lives. If the festival commemorates a particular event or celebrates some lofty ideal, that theme becomes more firmly embedded in the minds of the participants by being associated repeatedly with the rites and ceremonies performed. The feasts of the ancient Hebrews had this positive function. The great festivals of their religious calendar commemorated specific occasions when God had reached out in power to intervene for his people or had provided for them in their distress. By celebrating these feasts on a regular basis, the Hebrews continually affirmed that their God had directed their destiny. Their repeated rehearsal of God’s help and love for them reminded them that he was still able to sustain them. Especially in times of hardship, it pointed to the reality of God’s presence and activity among them. Faith sustained by this means furnished an invaluable spiritual dimension to the life of the nation and provided a sense of continuity under divine provision and guidance. Only when corrupt or pagan elements were introduced into festive occasions did this important ingredient of national life begin to lose its vitality.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentFestivals\">Old Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<h5>General Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>These occasions were surprisingly numerous in Israel, considering the rather austere mode of life reflected in much of the OT. No doubt such celebrations offset or compensated for the hardships and insecurities of existence in the ancient Near East, and the Israelites made the most of every opportunity. A wedding was one of the most obvious occasions for celebration, and it is not surprising that a feast was prepared for the marriage of Rachel and Jacob (Gn 29:22) in which the whole neighborhood participated. Just how long this particular feast lasted is unknown, but some marriage festivals continued for a week, as in the case of the marriage between Samson and the woman of Timnah (Jgs 14:17). Wine that makes glad man’s heart (Ps 104:15) was consumed freely on such occasions.<\/p>\n<p>Birthdays were often observed in a festive spirit, especially where a royal person was concerned (Gn 40:20). Solomon’s dream was commemorated with a feast provided for his servants (1 Kgs 3:15), and when the temple was dedicated, the occasion was celebrated for a full week (8:65). Kings and queens held feasts periodically to mark certain occasions or to express goodwill (cf. Est 1:3; 2:18; 5:4, 14; 7:2, 7; Dn 5:1). Herdsmen traditionally made a feast for the shearing of the first sheep (Dt 18:4).<\/p>\n<h5>Preexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>In addition to the general festivals, which were frequently of a secular nature, communal feasts were prescribed for the Israelites that had a specifically spiritual significance. They were meant to emphasize the activity of God on behalf of his people and to remind them that continued divine blessing depended upon their obedience to his will. The catalog of festivals in Leviticus 23:2 began with an injunction to observe the Sabbath. The seventh day, in which God ceased from creating (Gn 2:3), was holy, though it is difficult to determine the extent to which it was kept until the time of Moses (Ex 20:8-11). From that time on, Sabbath observance stressed refraining from all work so as to commemorate properly God’s own rest from creative activity (31:17) and his deliverance of his people from bondage in Egypt (Dt 5:12-15). Sabbath celebration was the sign of a special relationship between God and the Israelites. During this 24-hour period, even trivial tasks like making a fire (Ex 35:3) or gathering wood (Nm 15:32-33) were prohibited on pain of death. Journeys of any distance also came under the Sabbath ban (Ex 16:29). Special offerings were part of the observance (Nm 28:9-10), and the bread of the Presence was replaced in the tabernacle (Lv 24:5-8). Despite the restrictions on activity, the Sabbath was meant to symbolize a time of happiness and security in the presence of God (cf. Is 58:13-14), since its observance would bring blessing to the individual and to the whole land.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the New Moon<\/h6>\n<p>The new moon was a monthly celebration based on the lunar calendar. It was especially appropriate for an agricultural people, since everyone could tell when the moon was new. Special offerings were prescribed for this festival, consisting of a burnt sacrifice, a grain offering, and a drink offering (Nm 28:11-15). In addition, a male goat was sacrificed to God as a sin offering, and trumpet blasts were sounded over the sacrificial offerings as a memorial before God (10:10). The sacrifices prescribed for the new moon festival were significantly greater than those required in Numbers 28:9-10 for the weekly Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>This lunar feast was popular throughout Israelite history. During the monarchy, the Levites were required to assist the Aaronic priests at the new moon festival, as well as on the Sabbath (1 Chr 23:29-31). The preexilic prophets may well have taken advantage of the large gatherings to give guidance to the people or proclaim prophetic oracles (cf. 2 Kgs 4:23), though to what extent this was done is uncertain. Not everyone found the period of rest and celebration valuable, however, and Amos (Am 8:5) complained about those avaricious Israelites who felt that such observances interfered with the business of making a living. The feast could not be observed when the Judeans were in exile in Babylonia (cf. Hos 2:11), but under Ezra and Nehemiah, its observance was restored (Neh 10:33). In Isaiah 66:22-23 it was related to Israel’s final destiny and was an accepted part of the ordinances for Ezekiel’s ideal temple (Ez 45:17).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the festival was to enhance the unity of national life by reminding the Israelites that God’s covenant with their ancestors was permanent and still binding upon the nation. It also stressed the loving nature and providence of a God who could begin such a relationship and carry out his promises with complete faithfulness (cf. Ps 104:19).<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Trumpets<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Trumpets was celebrated on the first day of the seventh new moon. This month, subsequently named Tishri, was especially holy, and for this reason was governed by certain regulations different from those of ordinary new moon festivals. The trumpets were blown on the first day (Lv 23:24) as the animal and cereal sacrifices were offered. From Numbers 29:2-6 it appears that the offerings required for this particular feast exceeded those prescribed for normal Sabbath sacrifice, but were somewhat less than those required for the regular new moon festival (cf. Nm 28:11). This feast was to be observed as a day of solemn rest and as a holy convocation, and the trumpets were sounded as a triumphant memorial to God’s great provision for his people through the Sinai covenant.<\/p>\n<p>The seventh month was particularly sacred, partly because of its place in the hallowed cycle of sevens, but also because the Day of Atonement (or Yom Kippur) and the Feast of Tabernacles, or Booths (Shelters), occurred during this period. The latter feast followed the Day of Atonement by some five days (Lv 23:33), and its joyful character served to offset somewhat the solemnity of the annual penitential occasion when the nation confessed its collective sins and saw them banished symbolically into the wilderness as the scapegoat was driven from the congregation.<\/p>\n<h6>The Sabbatical Year<\/h6>\n<p>Another festival closely connected with the institution of the Sabbath was the sabbatical year. At the end of each cycle of six years, the following 12 months were observed as a “sabbath of rest for the land.” During this interval, the ground was to lie fallow (Ex 23:11) without any form of cultivation, and whatever sprouted and grew from it naturally was assigned to the poor and needy (Lv 25:6). This provision for the land itself constituted one of the most important ecological principles of Scripture. Like God’s people, the land was holy, and just as they needed to have regular intervals of rest from daily work in order to regain their energy and spiritual vitality through worship, so the ground needed to rest and recuperate from the strain of constant cultivation. The festival reminded the Israelites that the land on which they lived had been given to them by God in fulfillment of his covenant undertaking to provide richly for their physical needs (cf. Dt 8:7-10). To keep the Israelites from experiencing any shortages or other hardships during the Year of Sabbath, God promised that in the year immediately preceding the sabbatical period, the land would bear fruit to suffice for the next three years (Lv 25:21). This assurance was based upon the experience of the wilderness wanderings, when on the sixth day of the week sufficient manna appeared to last through the Sabbath (Ex 16:5).<\/p>\n<p>In this festival period, God’s absolute claim over the land was reaffirmed (cf. Lv 25:23), and the faith of the nation in God’s ability to provide for future needs was reinforced. The provisions that freed the land for a year from agricultural bondage were paralleled in the seventh year of rest by those requiring liberation of slaves and debtors. These underprivileged members of society were to be released from their obligations of servitude. As a result, men and women who had become slaves for one reason or another were given personal liberty (Ex 21:2-6), and under proclamation of the Lord’s release, the provisions applying to debt were rescinded (Dt 15:1-6). The sabbatical year seems to have been a regular part of preexilic Israelite life, although some abuses were noted in Jeremiah 34:8-22. There the prophet took advantage of the opportunity presented to instruct the people in the nature and purpose of the sabbatical year ordinance. He also warned the wayward Judeans that because they had disobeyed the commands of God in denying proper liberty to their slaves, they would have their own freedom taken away in a far more serious manner by being carried captive to Babylonia after seeing their land destroyed. The lesson was not lost upon those who returned from exile, for under the administration of Nehemiah, the Jews bound themselves by a covenant to observe the principle of the sabbatical year (Neh 10:31). This undertaking evidently took its impetus from the reading of the law of Moses at the Feast of Booths (Shelters), which coincidentally occurred at the beginning of the sabbatical year (Neh 8:13-18).<\/p>\n<h6>Jubilee<\/h6>\n<p>Still another feast based on the principle of the sabbath was the Year of Jubilee, or Pentecostal year (Lv 25:8-55; 27:17-24). As the sabbatical year was related to the concept of the seventh day, so the Pentecostal (50th) year marked the completion of a cycle of seven sabbatical years. The commencement of a jubilee year was proclaimed on the Day of Atonement throughout the land by means of trumpet blasts (Lv 25:9). The activities that took place during the Pentecostal year were similar to those prescribed for the sabbatical year. A special feature was that land that had been sold during the preceding 49 years was returned to its original owners, a procedure that sometimes involved financial adjustments. To prevent abuse of the process through opportunism or speculation, the Hebrews were instructed to deal fairly and honestly with one another in the fear of God, who was the real owner of the land (Lv 25:14-17). As with the sabbatical year, God promised to make provision before the jubilee year so that no one would suffer hardship. It was during the Year of Jubilee that those who were slaves in Hebrew households were given their liberty, so that everyone in the land would commence a new cycle of sabbatical years on the same footing, as free persons under God.<\/p>\n<h5>Seasonal Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>Three annual festivals that followed the seasons of the year rather than phases of the moon furnished important occasions for commemorating God’s power and provision in national life. These festivals were designated by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span><em>,<\/em> indicating a festival usually observed by some sort of pilgrimage. These three festivals were prescribed in Exodus 23:14-17 and Deuteronomy 16:16, and consisted of the Feast of Passover and Unleavened Bread, the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost), and the Festival of Booths (Tabernacles). On these occasions, all the males of Israel were commanded to make pilgrimage to the sanctuary and celebrate these festivals (Ex 12:14). The Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread were originally separate ordinances, but since the latter always followed immediately upon the Passover rite, they naturally blended into a single festival.<\/p>\n<h6>Passover<\/h6>\n<p>The Passover was of supreme theological significance for the Israelites, since it marked one of the most momentous acts of divine intervention in their history, the beginning of their deliverance from bondage in Egypt when, in the final plague, God destroyed the firstborn of the Egyptians but spared those Israelites whose homes had blood smeared on the doorposts (Ex 12:11-30). God commanded that the day was to be observed as a memorial feast (v 14), and the next Passover celebration occurred in the Sinai Desert (Nm 9:1-5). In the Hebrew calendar the Passover festival came in the first month, called Abib in Deuteronomy 16:1, but known after the exile as Nisan (cf. Neh 2:1). The Passover rite took place the 14th evening (Lv 23:5), and this was followed by a seven-day period during which nothing leavened was to be eaten. The principle for removing all leaven from bread was similar to that underlying the draining of blood from animal flesh. Both leaven and blood had quickening power and were to be kept separate as an offering to God. The first and seventh days of this period were marked by a holy assembly, during which the only work permitted was the preparation of food (Ex 12:16). This period when unleavened bread was eaten was described as a festival because it opened the seven-week period of grain harvest (Dt 16:9). During this feast, special burnt sacrifices were offered, followed with a sheaf of newly harvested barley at the Feast of Firstfruits. By NT times the festivals of Passover and Unleavened Bread were well-attended celebrations and were known as the “days of unleavened bread” (Lk 22:1; Acts 12:3). The theme of Israel’s deliverance from the power of Egypt by divine intervention assured the Israelites that God was always ready to act on behalf of a faithful and obedient covenant people. It also reminded them that they had once been slaves (Dt 16:12). In Israelite life the early Passover and Unleavened Bread observances were comparatively simple in character, but during the monarchy more elaborate Passover rituals came into use (cf. 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 35:1-19).<\/p>\n<h6>Pentecost<\/h6>\n<p>The second great festival, Pentecost (or Weeks) lasted one day only and was observed on the 50th day after the newly harvested barley sheaf had been waved before the Lord at the end of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Dt 16:9-12). The festival marked the end of the barley harvest and the beginning of the wheat harvest, the beginning of the period when firstfruits could be offered (cf. Ex 23:16; 34:22; Nm 28:26). The feast day was marked by the presentation of two wheat-flour loaves along with sacrifices of seven lambs, two rams, and a bull (Lv 23:15-20). Freewill gifts to God were presented to reflect gratitude for his blessings, and the entire occasion was one of communal rejoicing (Dt 16:10-11). Since Pentecost was essentially a harvest festival (Ex 23:16), the Israelites were called on to recognize that they depended entirely upon God for their material prosperity. In Deuteronomy 26, specific instructions were given for the ritual of presenting firstfruits from the harvest. It comprised a great confession of faith set within the framework of Israel’s history, and it recounted God’s deliverance of the nation from Egyptian oppression and his provision of a land that could amply supply the needs of his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of Tabernacles<\/h6>\n<p>This festival, known variously as the Feast of Booths, Tabernacles, Shelters (Lv 23:34; Dt 16:13), or Ingathering (Ex 34:22), was the third great occasion that all Hebrew males were required to observe annually. It began on the 15th day of the seventh month (Tishri), shortly after the observance of the Day of Atonement, which fell on the 10th day. The Feast of Booths lasted for one week and involved pilgrimage. It was associated initially with the end of the year (Ex 34:22), when the agricultural work had been completed. The first day was marked by a symbolic cessation from all activity, after which burnt offerings were presented to the Lord. The eighth day was also one on which the congregation of Israel abstained from manual work and again offered burnt sacrifices. Leviticus 23:39-43 furnished details for the rituals that gave the festival its special name of booths or shelters or tabernacles. The fruit of “goodly trees” was to be gathered on the first day of the feast, along with palm fronds, willow branches, and boughs from trees in full leaf. From these, rough shelters or booths were to be constructed in which the people lived for the week of the feast. Every seventh year the observances were marked by a public recital of the covenant provisions to which the Israelites under Moses had committed themselves, a procedure designed to keep fresh in their minds the obligations as well as the blessings of the covenant relationship. A particularly significant observance of the Feast of Tabernacles took place in the time of Ezra, when the Judean community returned from Babylon—a celebration of a kind unknown for centuries (Neh 8:13-18). From the context it appears that observance of the feast had lapsed during the monarchy. The feast at Shiloh where Hannah was mistaken for a drunken woman and the feast referred to in Judges 21:19 were evidently the Feast of Booths. In a prophetic vision in which he saw all nations coming to Jerusalem to observe the Festival of Booths, Zechariah warned that those who did not continue this tradition could expect hardship and shortages of food (Zec 14:16-19).<\/p>\n<h5>Postexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>There are a few minor festivals that were created in the period after the Jews returned from exile; some of these festivals had their origin in specific historical occasions.<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Purim<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Purim, also known as the Festival of Lots, was a joyful occasion occurring on the 14th day of the 12th month (Adar). It celebrated the way in which Esther and Mordecai were used by God to deliver his people in the Persian Empire from extermination by Haman (Est 9:21, 24-28). The feast was observed on the 14th day of Adar by those living in villages, and on the 15th by the inhabitants of walled towns and cities. The explanation of the name of the festival is given in Esther 9:24-26, and its observance reminded the Hebrews of God’s ability to save them during a time of anti-Semitic activity in Persia. The deliverance memorialized in this festival has consoled the Jews on other occasions when they have suffered persecution. Traditionally the scroll of Esther was read aloud in the synagogue on the evening before the feast, and there was a great outcry, especially among the children present, whenever the names of the hated Haman and his sons were mentioned.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the Dedication of the Temple<\/h6>\n<p>Another joyous festival that lasted for eight days was the Feast of the Dedication of the Temple (1 Macc 4:52-59; 2 Macc 10:6-8), familiar to modern readers as Hanukkah, or the Festival of Lights. The specific dedication that prompted the feast occurred in 164 <span>BC<\/span>, when Judas Maccabeus reconsecrated the temple in Jerusalem after it had been defiled by Antiochus IV Epiphanes. The celebrations commenced on the 25th day of the ninth month (Kislev) and were marked at night by blazing lights and lanterns. The stories of brave opposition by the Maccabees to the crushing forces of paganism were recounted, and the feast was one of praise to God for his marvelous deliverance of the Jews during the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentFestivals\">New Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<p>In Christ’s time the Sabbath was observed rigorously and was the occasion for synagogue worship (cf. Lk 4:16; Acts 13:14; 18:4). Pharisaic law prohibited all work, and Jesus came into conflict with the authorities periodically for breaches of the Sabbath regulations (cf. Mt 12:1-4; Mk 3:1-5; Lk 13:10-17). In the primitive church, worship occurred on “the first day of the week” (i.e., Sunday) to commemorate Christ’s resurrection. The early Christians initially participated in Jewish ceremonies (cf. Acts 20:16; 1 Cor 16:8). It was during the Feast of Pentecost, after Christ’s resurrection and ascension, that the Spirit was poured out (Acts 2:1-4), fulfilling Joel 2:28-32 and commencing the history of the Christian church as such.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread were of great significance in the life of Christ (cf. Jn 4:45; 5:1; 6:4; 12:1-26), for the occasion was a very popular one in NT times (cf. 12:20). On the Passover, Pilate had instituted the custom of clemency to a prisoner nominated by the populace (Mt 27:15; Mk 15:6). Jesus participated actively in the Passover rituals (cf. Lk 2:42; Jn 2:13; 6:4). The Last Supper with his disciples occurred just prior to the Passover (Jn 13:1), when Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus to the Pharisees (Lk 22:4-6). The breaking of bread and the drinking of wine at that Passover celebration (Mk 14:22-25) were related directly to Christ’s forthcoming death on the cross in a sacramental manner. Christ’s disciples were instructed to observe this rite as a memorial of his suffering and death for human sin (1 Cor 11:24-26) and as a proclamation of the power of the cross until the Lord returns in glory. Some scholars have suggested that Christ was actually hanging on the cross when the Passover lamb was being slaughtered, and if that chronology is correct, it would represent Jesus graphically as the “Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (Jn 1:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus was also present once when the Feast of Tabernacles was celebrated (7:10). In his day water was carried in procession from the pool of Siloam as an offering to God, and the ceremony most probably prompted Christ’s discourse on living water and eternal life (vv 37-39). On at least one occasion Jesus was in Jerusalem when the Festival of Lights occurred (Jn 10:22) and narrowly missed death by stoning.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was entertained occasionally at private feasts (cf. Lk 5:29), and once remedied an emergency situation when the wine ran out at a wedding ceremony (Jn 2:8-10). He was critical of the Pharisees for securing the chief seats at feasts (Mt 23:6; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46) and taught that festivals ought to benefit the poor (Lk 14:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolismofFeasts\">Symbolism of Feasts<\/p>\n<p>Many aspects of the ancient Hebrew feasts were interpreted symbolically in the early church. Paul regarded the earliest Hebrew Christians as the firstfruits of the Israel of God (Rom 11:16). In Romans 8:23, the Holy Spirit as possessed by Christians was regarded as only a token of what was to come, and as such was the firstfruit of the Spirit. Christians themselves were described in James 1:18 as the firstfruits of God’s creatures who were brought forth by the Word of Truth. The resurrection of Jesus was considered by Paul to be the firstfruits of those who slept (1 Cor 15:20, 23). In an allusion to OT festivals, Paul spoke of the Sabbaths, new moons, and feasts as merely being a shadow of good things to come (Col 2:16-17). The Passover was used figuratively to emphasize that Christ our Passover Lamb had been sacrificed for us. Believers were urged to keep the feast with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth, and not with the old leaven of malice and evil (1 Cor 5:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Offerings and Sacrifices; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL<\/h3>\n<p>Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion.<\/p>\n\n<p>In contemporary usage “festival” usually refers to activities extending over a period of time, while “feast” indicates one part of the celebration, often a meal. However, in religious usage, both ancient and modern, the two words are used interchangeably. The ancient Hebrews employed the words <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mo’ed<\/span> (“seasons”) and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span> for their great public celebrations, while feasts of a more private nature were commonly described by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mishteh<\/span><em>.<\/em> The majority of English translations of Scripture do not differentiate between these words.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FeastsandTheirFunctions\">Feasts and Their Functions<\/p>\n<p>Each festival places great emphasis on community participation and on the continuity of social or religious tradition, especially where the celebrations are elements of a regular civil or religious calendar. Without community backing, even in a family celebration, no festival can be successful. When there is communal participation, a festival can reinforce the individual and community memory of specific occasions, and can perpetuate that store of recollection over years and generations. Such shared memory has a cohesive effect upon a cooperating community, large or small, and serves to establish the traditions by which the group lives. If the festival commemorates a particular event or celebrates some lofty ideal, that theme becomes more firmly embedded in the minds of the participants by being associated repeatedly with the rites and ceremonies performed. The feasts of the ancient Hebrews had this positive function. The great festivals of their religious calendar commemorated specific occasions when God had reached out in power to intervene for his people or had provided for them in their distress. By celebrating these feasts on a regular basis, the Hebrews continually affirmed that their God had directed their destiny. Their repeated rehearsal of God’s help and love for them reminded them that he was still able to sustain them. Especially in times of hardship, it pointed to the reality of God’s presence and activity among them. Faith sustained by this means furnished an invaluable spiritual dimension to the life of the nation and provided a sense of continuity under divine provision and guidance. Only when corrupt or pagan elements were introduced into festive occasions did this important ingredient of national life begin to lose its vitality.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentFestivals\">Old Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<h5>General Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>These occasions were surprisingly numerous in Israel, considering the rather austere mode of life reflected in much of the OT. No doubt such celebrations offset or compensated for the hardships and insecurities of existence in the ancient Near East, and the Israelites made the most of every opportunity. A wedding was one of the most obvious occasions for celebration, and it is not surprising that a feast was prepared for the marriage of Rachel and Jacob (Gn 29:22) in which the whole neighborhood participated. Just how long this particular feast lasted is unknown, but some marriage festivals continued for a week, as in the case of the marriage between Samson and the woman of Timnah (Jgs 14:17). Wine that makes glad man’s heart (Ps 104:15) was consumed freely on such occasions.<\/p>\n<p>Birthdays were often observed in a festive spirit, especially where a royal person was concerned (Gn 40:20). Solomon’s dream was commemorated with a feast provided for his servants (1 Kgs 3:15), and when the temple was dedicated, the occasion was celebrated for a full week (8:65). Kings and queens held feasts periodically to mark certain occasions or to express goodwill (cf. Est 1:3; 2:18; 5:4, 14; 7:2, 7; Dn 5:1). Herdsmen traditionally made a feast for the shearing of the first sheep (Dt 18:4).<\/p>\n<h5>Preexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>In addition to the general festivals, which were frequently of a secular nature, communal feasts were prescribed for the Israelites that had a specifically spiritual significance. They were meant to emphasize the activity of God on behalf of his people and to remind them that continued divine blessing depended upon their obedience to his will. The catalog of festivals in Leviticus 23:2 began with an injunction to observe the Sabbath. The seventh day, in which God ceased from creating (Gn 2:3), was holy, though it is difficult to determine the extent to which it was kept until the time of Moses (Ex 20:8-11). From that time on, Sabbath observance stressed refraining from all work so as to commemorate properly God’s own rest from creative activity (31:17) and his deliverance of his people from bondage in Egypt (Dt 5:12-15). Sabbath celebration was the sign of a special relationship between God and the Israelites. During this 24-hour period, even trivial tasks like making a fire (Ex 35:3) or gathering wood (Nm 15:32-33) were prohibited on pain of death. Journeys of any distance also came under the Sabbath ban (Ex 16:29). Special offerings were part of the observance (Nm 28:9-10), and the bread of the Presence was replaced in the tabernacle (Lv 24:5-8). Despite the restrictions on activity, the Sabbath was meant to symbolize a time of happiness and security in the presence of God (cf. Is 58:13-14), since its observance would bring blessing to the individual and to the whole land.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the New Moon<\/h6>\n<p>The new moon was a monthly celebration based on the lunar calendar. It was especially appropriate for an agricultural people, since everyone could tell when the moon was new. Special offerings were prescribed for this festival, consisting of a burnt sacrifice, a grain offering, and a drink offering (Nm 28:11-15). In addition, a male goat was sacrificed to God as a sin offering, and trumpet blasts were sounded over the sacrificial offerings as a memorial before God (10:10). The sacrifices prescribed for the new moon festival were significantly greater than those required in Numbers 28:9-10 for the weekly Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>This lunar feast was popular throughout Israelite history. During the monarchy, the Levites were required to assist the Aaronic priests at the new moon festival, as well as on the Sabbath (1 Chr 23:29-31). The preexilic prophets may well have taken advantage of the large gatherings to give guidance to the people or proclaim prophetic oracles (cf. 2 Kgs 4:23), though to what extent this was done is uncertain. Not everyone found the period of rest and celebration valuable, however, and Amos (Am 8:5) complained about those avaricious Israelites who felt that such observances interfered with the business of making a living. The feast could not be observed when the Judeans were in exile in Babylonia (cf. Hos 2:11), but under Ezra and Nehemiah, its observance was restored (Neh 10:33). In Isaiah 66:22-23 it was related to Israel’s final destiny and was an accepted part of the ordinances for Ezekiel’s ideal temple (Ez 45:17).<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the festival was to enhance the unity of national life by reminding the Israelites that God’s covenant with their ancestors was permanent and still binding upon the nation. It also stressed the loving nature and providence of a God who could begin such a relationship and carry out his promises with complete faithfulness (cf. Ps 104:19).<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Trumpets<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Trumpets was celebrated on the first day of the seventh new moon. This month, subsequently named Tishri, was especially holy, and for this reason was governed by certain regulations different from those of ordinary new moon festivals. The trumpets were blown on the first day (Lv 23:24) as the animal and cereal sacrifices were offered. From Numbers 29:2-6 it appears that the offerings required for this particular feast exceeded those prescribed for normal Sabbath sacrifice, but were somewhat less than those required for the regular new moon festival (cf. Nm 28:11). This feast was to be observed as a day of solemn rest and as a holy convocation, and the trumpets were sounded as a triumphant memorial to God’s great provision for his people through the Sinai covenant.<\/p>\n<p>The seventh month was particularly sacred, partly because of its place in the hallowed cycle of sevens, but also because the Day of Atonement (or Yom Kippur) and the Feast of Tabernacles, or Booths (Shelters), occurred during this period. The latter feast followed the Day of Atonement by some five days (Lv 23:33), and its joyful character served to offset somewhat the solemnity of the annual penitential occasion when the nation confessed its collective sins and saw them banished symbolically into the wilderness as the scapegoat was driven from the congregation.<\/p>\n<h6>The Sabbatical Year<\/h6>\n<p>Another festival closely connected with the institution of the Sabbath was the sabbatical year. At the end of each cycle of six years, the following 12 months were observed as a “sabbath of rest for the land.” During this interval, the ground was to lie fallow (Ex 23:11) without any form of cultivation, and whatever sprouted and grew from it naturally was assigned to the poor and needy (Lv 25:6). This provision for the land itself constituted one of the most important ecological principles of Scripture. Like God’s people, the land was holy, and just as they needed to have regular intervals of rest from daily work in order to regain their energy and spiritual vitality through worship, so the ground needed to rest and recuperate from the strain of constant cultivation. The festival reminded the Israelites that the land on which they lived had been given to them by God in fulfillment of his covenant undertaking to provide richly for their physical needs (cf. Dt 8:7-10). To keep the Israelites from experiencing any shortages or other hardships during the Year of Sabbath, God promised that in the year immediately preceding the sabbatical period, the land would bear fruit to suffice for the next three years (Lv 25:21). This assurance was based upon the experience of the wilderness wanderings, when on the sixth day of the week sufficient manna appeared to last through the Sabbath (Ex 16:5).<\/p>\n<p>In this festival period, God’s absolute claim over the land was reaffirmed (cf. Lv 25:23), and the faith of the nation in God’s ability to provide for future needs was reinforced. The provisions that freed the land for a year from agricultural bondage were paralleled in the seventh year of rest by those requiring liberation of slaves and debtors. These underprivileged members of society were to be released from their obligations of servitude. As a result, men and women who had become slaves for one reason or another were given personal liberty (Ex 21:2-6), and under proclamation of the Lord’s release, the provisions applying to debt were rescinded (Dt 15:1-6). The sabbatical year seems to have been a regular part of preexilic Israelite life, although some abuses were noted in Jeremiah 34:8-22. There the prophet took advantage of the opportunity presented to instruct the people in the nature and purpose of the sabbatical year ordinance. He also warned the wayward Judeans that because they had disobeyed the commands of God in denying proper liberty to their slaves, they would have their own freedom taken away in a far more serious manner by being carried captive to Babylonia after seeing their land destroyed. The lesson was not lost upon those who returned from exile, for under the administration of Nehemiah, the Jews bound themselves by a covenant to observe the principle of the sabbatical year (Neh 10:31). This undertaking evidently took its impetus from the reading of the law of Moses at the Feast of Booths (Shelters), which coincidentally occurred at the beginning of the sabbatical year (Neh 8:13-18).<\/p>\n<h6>Jubilee<\/h6>\n<p>Still another feast based on the principle of the sabbath was the Year of Jubilee, or Pentecostal year (Lv 25:8-55; 27:17-24). As the sabbatical year was related to the concept of the seventh day, so the Pentecostal (50th) year marked the completion of a cycle of seven sabbatical years. The commencement of a jubilee year was proclaimed on the Day of Atonement throughout the land by means of trumpet blasts (Lv 25:9). The activities that took place during the Pentecostal year were similar to those prescribed for the sabbatical year. A special feature was that land that had been sold during the preceding 49 years was returned to its original owners, a procedure that sometimes involved financial adjustments. To prevent abuse of the process through opportunism or speculation, the Hebrews were instructed to deal fairly and honestly with one another in the fear of God, who was the real owner of the land (Lv 25:14-17). As with the sabbatical year, God promised to make provision before the jubilee year so that no one would suffer hardship. It was during the Year of Jubilee that those who were slaves in Hebrew households were given their liberty, so that everyone in the land would commence a new cycle of sabbatical years on the same footing, as free persons under God.<\/p>\n<h5>Seasonal Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>Three annual festivals that followed the seasons of the year rather than phases of the moon furnished important occasions for commemorating God’s power and provision in national life. These festivals were designated by the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hag<\/span><em>,<\/em> indicating a festival usually observed by some sort of pilgrimage. These three festivals were prescribed in Exodus 23:14-17 and Deuteronomy 16:16, and consisted of the Feast of Passover and Unleavened Bread, the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost), and the Festival of Booths (Tabernacles). On these occasions, all the males of Israel were commanded to make pilgrimage to the sanctuary and celebrate these festivals (Ex 12:14). The Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread were originally separate ordinances, but since the latter always followed immediately upon the Passover rite, they naturally blended into a single festival.<\/p>\n<h6>Passover<\/h6>\n<p>The Passover was of supreme theological significance for the Israelites, since it marked one of the most momentous acts of divine intervention in their history, the beginning of their deliverance from bondage in Egypt when, in the final plague, God destroyed the firstborn of the Egyptians but spared those Israelites whose homes had blood smeared on the doorposts (Ex 12:11-30). God commanded that the day was to be observed as a memorial feast (v 14), and the next Passover celebration occurred in the Sinai Desert (Nm 9:1-5). In the Hebrew calendar the Passover festival came in the first month, called Abib in Deuteronomy 16:1, but known after the exile as Nisan (cf. Neh 2:1). The Passover rite took place the 14th evening (Lv 23:5), and this was followed by a seven-day period during which nothing leavened was to be eaten. The principle for removing all leaven from bread was similar to that underlying the draining of blood from animal flesh. Both leaven and blood had quickening power and were to be kept separate as an offering to God. The first and seventh days of this period were marked by a holy assembly, during which the only work permitted was the preparation of food (Ex 12:16). This period when unleavened bread was eaten was described as a festival because it opened the seven-week period of grain harvest (Dt 16:9). During this feast, special burnt sacrifices were offered, followed with a sheaf of newly harvested barley at the Feast of Firstfruits. By NT times the festivals of Passover and Unleavened Bread were well-attended celebrations and were known as the “days of unleavened bread” (Lk 22:1; Acts 12:3). The theme of Israel’s deliverance from the power of Egypt by divine intervention assured the Israelites that God was always ready to act on behalf of a faithful and obedient covenant people. It also reminded them that they had once been slaves (Dt 16:12). In Israelite life the early Passover and Unleavened Bread observances were comparatively simple in character, but during the monarchy more elaborate Passover rituals came into use (cf. 2 Kgs 23:21-23; 2 Chr 35:1-19).<\/p>\n<h6>Pentecost<\/h6>\n<p>The second great festival, Pentecost (or Weeks) lasted one day only and was observed on the 50th day after the newly harvested barley sheaf had been waved before the Lord at the end of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Dt 16:9-12). The festival marked the end of the barley harvest and the beginning of the wheat harvest, the beginning of the period when firstfruits could be offered (cf. Ex 23:16; 34:22; Nm 28:26). The feast day was marked by the presentation of two wheat-flour loaves along with sacrifices of seven lambs, two rams, and a bull (Lv 23:15-20). Freewill gifts to God were presented to reflect gratitude for his blessings, and the entire occasion was one of communal rejoicing (Dt 16:10-11). Since Pentecost was essentially a harvest festival (Ex 23:16), the Israelites were called on to recognize that they depended entirely upon God for their material prosperity. In Deuteronomy 26, specific instructions were given for the ritual of presenting firstfruits from the harvest. It comprised a great confession of faith set within the framework of Israel’s history, and it recounted God’s deliverance of the nation from Egyptian oppression and his provision of a land that could amply supply the needs of his people.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of Tabernacles<\/h6>\n<p>This festival, known variously as the Feast of Booths, Tabernacles, Shelters (Lv 23:34; Dt 16:13), or Ingathering (Ex 34:22), was the third great occasion that all Hebrew males were required to observe annually. It began on the 15th day of the seventh month (Tishri), shortly after the observance of the Day of Atonement, which fell on the 10th day. The Feast of Booths lasted for one week and involved pilgrimage. It was associated initially with the end of the year (Ex 34:22), when the agricultural work had been completed. The first day was marked by a symbolic cessation from all activity, after which burnt offerings were presented to the Lord. The eighth day was also one on which the congregation of Israel abstained from manual work and again offered burnt sacrifices. Leviticus 23:39-43 furnished details for the rituals that gave the festival its special name of booths or shelters or tabernacles. The fruit of “goodly trees” was to be gathered on the first day of the feast, along with palm fronds, willow branches, and boughs from trees in full leaf. From these, rough shelters or booths were to be constructed in which the people lived for the week of the feast. Every seventh year the observances were marked by a public recital of the covenant provisions to which the Israelites under Moses had committed themselves, a procedure designed to keep fresh in their minds the obligations as well as the blessings of the covenant relationship. A particularly significant observance of the Feast of Tabernacles took place in the time of Ezra, when the Judean community returned from Babylon—a celebration of a kind unknown for centuries (Neh 8:13-18). From the context it appears that observance of the feast had lapsed during the monarchy. The feast at Shiloh where Hannah was mistaken for a drunken woman and the feast referred to in Judges 21:19 were evidently the Feast of Booths. In a prophetic vision in which he saw all nations coming to Jerusalem to observe the Festival of Booths, Zechariah warned that those who did not continue this tradition could expect hardship and shortages of food (Zec 14:16-19).<\/p>\n<h5>Postexilic Festivals<\/h5>\n<p>There are a few minor festivals that were created in the period after the Jews returned from exile; some of these festivals had their origin in specific historical occasions.<\/p>\n<h6>The Festival of Purim<\/h6>\n<p>The Festival of Purim, also known as the Festival of Lots, was a joyful occasion occurring on the 14th day of the 12th month (Adar). It celebrated the way in which Esther and Mordecai were used by God to deliver his people in the Persian Empire from extermination by Haman (Est 9:21, 24-28). The feast was observed on the 14th day of Adar by those living in villages, and on the 15th by the inhabitants of walled towns and cities. The explanation of the name of the festival is given in Esther 9:24-26, and its observance reminded the Hebrews of God’s ability to save them during a time of anti-Semitic activity in Persia. The deliverance memorialized in this festival has consoled the Jews on other occasions when they have suffered persecution. Traditionally the scroll of Esther was read aloud in the synagogue on the evening before the feast, and there was a great outcry, especially among the children present, whenever the names of the hated Haman and his sons were mentioned.<\/p>\n<h6>Festival of the Dedication of the Temple<\/h6>\n<p>Another joyous festival that lasted for eight days was the Feast of the Dedication of the Temple (1 Macc 4:52-59; 2 Macc 10:6-8), familiar to modern readers as Hanukkah, or the Festival of Lights. The specific dedication that prompted the feast occurred in 164 <span>BC<\/span>, when Judas Maccabeus reconsecrated the temple in Jerusalem after it had been defiled by Antiochus IV Epiphanes. The celebrations commenced on the 25th day of the ninth month (Kislev) and were marked at night by blazing lights and lanterns. The stories of brave opposition by the Maccabees to the crushing forces of paganism were recounted, and the feast was one of praise to God for his marvelous deliverance of the Jews during the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentFestivals\">New Testament Festivals<\/p>\n<p>In Christ’s time the Sabbath was observed rigorously and was the occasion for synagogue worship (cf. Lk 4:16; Acts 13:14; 18:4). Pharisaic law prohibited all work, and Jesus came into conflict with the authorities periodically for breaches of the Sabbath regulations (cf. Mt 12:1-4; Mk 3:1-5; Lk 13:10-17). In the primitive church, worship occurred on “the first day of the week” (i.e., Sunday) to commemorate Christ’s resurrection. The early Christians initially participated in Jewish ceremonies (cf. Acts 20:16; 1 Cor 16:8). It was during the Feast of Pentecost, after Christ’s resurrection and ascension, that the Spirit was poured out (Acts 2:1-4), fulfilling Joel 2:28-32 and commencing the history of the Christian church as such.<\/p>\n<p>The Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread were of great significance in the life of Christ (cf. Jn 4:45; 5:1; 6:4; 12:1-26), for the occasion was a very popular one in NT times (cf. 12:20). On the Passover, Pilate had instituted the custom of clemency to a prisoner nominated by the populace (Mt 27:15; Mk 15:6). Jesus participated actively in the Passover rituals (cf. Lk 2:42; Jn 2:13; 6:4). The Last Supper with his disciples occurred just prior to the Passover (Jn 13:1), when Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus to the Pharisees (Lk 22:4-6). The breaking of bread and the drinking of wine at that Passover celebration (Mk 14:22-25) were related directly to Christ’s forthcoming death on the cross in a sacramental manner. Christ’s disciples were instructed to observe this rite as a memorial of his suffering and death for human sin (1 Cor 11:24-26) and as a proclamation of the power of the cross until the Lord returns in glory. Some scholars have suggested that Christ was actually hanging on the cross when the Passover lamb was being slaughtered, and if that chronology is correct, it would represent Jesus graphically as the “Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (Jn 1:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus was also present once when the Feast of Tabernacles was celebrated (7:10). In his day water was carried in procession from the pool of Siloam as an offering to God, and the ceremony most probably prompted Christ’s discourse on living water and eternal life (vv 37-39). On at least one occasion Jesus was in Jerusalem when the Festival of Lights occurred (Jn 10:22) and narrowly missed death by stoning.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was entertained occasionally at private feasts (cf. Lk 5:29), and once remedied an emergency situation when the wine ran out at a wedding ceremony (Jn 2:8-10). He was critical of the Pharisees for securing the chief seats at feasts (Mt 23:6; Mk 12:39; Lk 20:46) and taught that festivals ought to benefit the poor (Lk 14:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolismofFeasts\">Symbolism of Feasts<\/p>\n<p>Many aspects of the ancient Hebrew feasts were interpreted symbolically in the early church. Paul regarded the earliest Hebrew Christians as the firstfruits of the Israel of God (Rom 11:16). In Romans 8:23, the Holy Spirit as possessed by Christians was regarded as only a token of what was to come, and as such was the firstfruit of the Spirit. Christians themselves were described in James 1:18 as the firstfruits of God’s creatures who were brought forth by the Word of Truth. The resurrection of Jesus was considered by Paul to be the firstfruits of those who slept (1 Cor 15:20, 23). In an allusion to OT festivals, Paul spoke of the Sabbaths, new moons, and feasts as merely being a shadow of good things to come (Col 2:16-17). The Passover was used figuratively to emphasize that Christ our Passover Lamb had been sacrificed for us. Believers were urged to keep the feast with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth, and not with the old leaven of malice and evil (1 Cor 5:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Offerings and Sacrifices; Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion. In contemporary usag...","summary_en":"FEASTS AND FESTIVALS OF ISRAEL Occasions of public or private rejoicing to commemorate some significant event or personage. The element of celebration has a special meaning in the cycle of religious occasions and the rites and ceremonies associated with these particular days. While the idea of a feast commonly implies a banquet with plenteous food and drink, this element is not indispensable. Sometimes there is only a token amount, as in the celebration of Holy Communion. In contemporary usag...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":30178,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Philip","title_en":"Philip","content_ro":"<h3>PHILIP<\/h3>\n<li>1. Apostle whose name is placed fifth in each of the lists of the twelve after the two pairs of brothers, Simon Peter and Andrew, and James and John (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:14). John says that when John the Baptist bore witness to Jesus with the words, “Behold, the Lamb of God!” two of his disciples began to follow Jesus, and that one of these two was Andrew, who then declared to his brother Simon Peter, “We have found the Messiah,” and brought him to Jesus. (The other unnamed disciple was quite probably John himself, the writer of this account.) On the next day Jesus went to Galilee and there found Philip and addressed the call to him: “Follow me.” John adds that Philip was from Bethsaida. Philip in turn found Nathanael and told him, “We have found him of whom Moses in the law and also the prophets wrote,” and invited Nathanael, who was skeptical that any good could come out of Nazareth, to come and see for himself (Jn 1:35-51, <span>rsv<\/span>). From this is concluded that Philip was one of the first to follow Jesus and that he lost no time in persuading others to do the same.<\/li>\n<p>Like the other apostles, however, he still had much to learn about the person and the power of Christ. Hence, the testing question of Jesus to him on the occasion of the feeding of the 5,000, “How are we to buy bread, so that these people may eat?” and Philip’s puzzled response that even if they had 200 denarii (i.e., a large sum, roughly a person’s wages for half a year), it would not buy enough bread for each one to be given just a little to eat (Jn 6:5-7). The miracle that followed taught him that the feeding of this multitude presented no problem to the one who is the Lord of all creation. Philip’s next appearance is in Jerusalem after Christ’s triumphal entry into the city, when “some Greeks” (i.e., Greek-speaking non-Jews) approached him with the request “Sir, we wish to see Jesus.” Philip informs Andrew, and together they bring them to Jesus (12:20-22). This perhaps indicates that Philip was a person whom others found readily approachable, and also that he spoke Greek. In the upper room, prior to his arrest and trial, Jesus took the opportunity to impart further instruction to Philip, who had said, “Lord, show us the Father, and we shall be satisfied.” Philip hoped perhaps, in all devoutness, for the privilege of some special revelation (reminiscent of the request of Moses, Ex 33:18). But Jesus taught him that he himself, the incarnate Son, is the all-sufficient revelation of the Father to humanity (Jn 14:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>There is a tendency to confuse the apostle with the evangelist (see below) of the same name. It seems probable, however, that after preaching in various parts, the apostle settled in Hierapolis, a city of the Roman province of Asia, and died there. Whether his was a natural or a martyr’s death is uncertain.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>\n<li>2. Hellenistic Jew and one of the seven men appointed by the church in Jerusalem to supervise the daily ministry of assistance to the impoverished widows of the Christian community. They all, including Philip, had Greek names, and one of them, Nicolaus, was a proselyte (i.e., not a Jew by birth). Whether or not they were regarded as deacons in the technical sense is not absolutely clear from the account; this occasion has, however, been generally accepted as the origin of the order of the diaconate (Acts 6:1-7). Of the seven, Stephen and Philip are the only ones of whom we have any further record in the NT. They are described as men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom (v 3).<\/li>\n<p>That Philip became known as “the evangelist” is apparent from Acts 21:8. The designation was well deserved, for when the Jerusalem Christians were scattered by the persecution led by Saul of Tarsus, Philip went to a city of Samaria and proclaimed the gospel with such power there that a great number of people joyfully turned to Christ (Acts 8:1-8). In the midst of this spectacular work, Philip was divinely instructed to leave Samaria and go down to the desert area in the southern part of the country. Humanly speaking, for him to turn away from the multitudes, who were so eagerly responding to his preaching and to go to the uninhabited territory in the south, must have seemed foolish. Yet Philip showed himself not only sensitive but also obedient to the will of God and followed this guidance without question. In the desert he found not a crowd but a single person, an important Ethiopian court official who had visited Jerusalem and was now returning to Africa. The wisdom of God in directing Philip to this place was fully vindicated, for the Ethiopian was reading Isaiah 53, the great gospel chapter of the OT. Philip gave him the good news that this prophecy pointed to Jesus Christ. The Ethiopian subsequently believed and was baptized and went on his way rejoicing (vv 25-40). The conversion of this one person meant not only that Philip was the first to proclaim the gospel to a Gentile but also that the gospel was taken by this Ethiopian courtier to the continent of Africa.<\/p>\n<p>The prevailing nationalistic pride of the Jews was such that they despised the Samaritans and regarded the Gentiles as ceremonially unclean. But Philip, by his eager preaching of Christ first to the Samaritans and then to the Ethiopian, reflected the way in which the gospel penetrated social barriers and dissolved racial prejudices and demonstrated that the grace of God in Christ Jesus is freely available to all. Subsequently, Philip made his home in the coastal town of Caesarea. There he hospitably entertained Paul and Luke when they were en route to Jerusalem at the conclusion of the apostle’s third missionary journey. Luke tells us that Philip had four unmarried daughters who were prophetesses (Acts 21:8-9). Not long after this, when Paul was in custody in Caesarea for two years, the kindness and friendship of Philip must have meant much to him (23:31-35; 24:23, 27).<\/p>\n<li>3. Son of Herod the Great and Cleopatra and half brother of Antipas, whose mother was Malthace. He is called Herod in Luke 3:1. The latter was tetrarch of Perea and Galilee from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 39; Philip was tetrarch of Iturea and Trachonitis (plus certain other territories) to the northeast of Galilee for 37 years (4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 33). His wife was his niece Salome, who danced for Herod in exchange for the head of John the Baptist (Mt 14:3-12; Mk 6:17-29).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Herod, Herodian Family.<\/p>\n<li>4. Son of Herod the Great and Mariamne and husband of Salome’s mother, Herodias, who left him to become the mistress of his half brother Herod Antipas. It was for this immoral relationship that John the Baptist rebuked Herod and was later imprisoned and beheaded (Mt 14:3-12; Mk 6:17-29; Lk 3:19-20).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>PHILIP<\/h3>\n<li>1. Apostle whose name is placed fifth in each of the lists of the twelve after the two pairs of brothers, Simon Peter and Andrew, and James and John (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:14). John says that when John the Baptist bore witness to Jesus with the words, “Behold, the Lamb of God!” two of his disciples began to follow Jesus, and that one of these two was Andrew, who then declared to his brother Simon Peter, “We have found the Messiah,” and brought him to Jesus. (The other unnamed disciple was quite probably John himself, the writer of this account.) On the next day Jesus went to Galilee and there found Philip and addressed the call to him: “Follow me.” John adds that Philip was from Bethsaida. Philip in turn found Nathanael and told him, “We have found him of whom Moses in the law and also the prophets wrote,” and invited Nathanael, who was skeptical that any good could come out of Nazareth, to come and see for himself (Jn 1:35-51, <span>rsv<\/span>). From this is concluded that Philip was one of the first to follow Jesus and that he lost no time in persuading others to do the same.<\/li>\n<p>Like the other apostles, however, he still had much to learn about the person and the power of Christ. Hence, the testing question of Jesus to him on the occasion of the feeding of the 5,000, “How are we to buy bread, so that these people may eat?” and Philip’s puzzled response that even if they had 200 denarii (i.e., a large sum, roughly a person’s wages for half a year), it would not buy enough bread for each one to be given just a little to eat (Jn 6:5-7). The miracle that followed taught him that the feeding of this multitude presented no problem to the one who is the Lord of all creation. Philip’s next appearance is in Jerusalem after Christ’s triumphal entry into the city, when “some Greeks” (i.e., Greek-speaking non-Jews) approached him with the request “Sir, we wish to see Jesus.” Philip informs Andrew, and together they bring them to Jesus (12:20-22). This perhaps indicates that Philip was a person whom others found readily approachable, and also that he spoke Greek. In the upper room, prior to his arrest and trial, Jesus took the opportunity to impart further instruction to Philip, who had said, “Lord, show us the Father, and we shall be satisfied.” Philip hoped perhaps, in all devoutness, for the privilege of some special revelation (reminiscent of the request of Moses, Ex 33:18). But Jesus taught him that he himself, the incarnate Son, is the all-sufficient revelation of the Father to humanity (Jn 14:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>There is a tendency to confuse the apostle with the evangelist (see below) of the same name. It seems probable, however, that after preaching in various parts, the apostle settled in Hierapolis, a city of the Roman province of Asia, and died there. Whether his was a natural or a martyr’s death is uncertain.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>\n<li>2. Hellenistic Jew and one of the seven men appointed by the church in Jerusalem to supervise the daily ministry of assistance to the impoverished widows of the Christian community. They all, including Philip, had Greek names, and one of them, Nicolaus, was a proselyte (i.e., not a Jew by birth). Whether or not they were regarded as deacons in the technical sense is not absolutely clear from the account; this occasion has, however, been generally accepted as the origin of the order of the diaconate (Acts 6:1-7). Of the seven, Stephen and Philip are the only ones of whom we have any further record in the NT. They are described as men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom (v 3).<\/li>\n<p>That Philip became known as “the evangelist” is apparent from Acts 21:8. The designation was well deserved, for when the Jerusalem Christians were scattered by the persecution led by Saul of Tarsus, Philip went to a city of Samaria and proclaimed the gospel with such power there that a great number of people joyfully turned to Christ (Acts 8:1-8). In the midst of this spectacular work, Philip was divinely instructed to leave Samaria and go down to the desert area in the southern part of the country. Humanly speaking, for him to turn away from the multitudes, who were so eagerly responding to his preaching and to go to the uninhabited territory in the south, must have seemed foolish. Yet Philip showed himself not only sensitive but also obedient to the will of God and followed this guidance without question. In the desert he found not a crowd but a single person, an important Ethiopian court official who had visited Jerusalem and was now returning to Africa. The wisdom of God in directing Philip to this place was fully vindicated, for the Ethiopian was reading Isaiah 53, the great gospel chapter of the OT. Philip gave him the good news that this prophecy pointed to Jesus Christ. The Ethiopian subsequently believed and was baptized and went on his way rejoicing (vv 25-40). The conversion of this one person meant not only that Philip was the first to proclaim the gospel to a Gentile but also that the gospel was taken by this Ethiopian courtier to the continent of Africa.<\/p>\n<p>The prevailing nationalistic pride of the Jews was such that they despised the Samaritans and regarded the Gentiles as ceremonially unclean. But Philip, by his eager preaching of Christ first to the Samaritans and then to the Ethiopian, reflected the way in which the gospel penetrated social barriers and dissolved racial prejudices and demonstrated that the grace of God in Christ Jesus is freely available to all. Subsequently, Philip made his home in the coastal town of Caesarea. There he hospitably entertained Paul and Luke when they were en route to Jerusalem at the conclusion of the apostle’s third missionary journey. Luke tells us that Philip had four unmarried daughters who were prophetesses (Acts 21:8-9). Not long after this, when Paul was in custody in Caesarea for two years, the kindness and friendship of Philip must have meant much to him (23:31-35; 24:23, 27).<\/p>\n<li>3. Son of Herod the Great and Cleopatra and half brother of Antipas, whose mother was Malthace. He is called Herod in Luke 3:1. The latter was tetrarch of Perea and Galilee from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 39; Philip was tetrarch of Iturea and Trachonitis (plus certain other territories) to the northeast of Galilee for 37 years (4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 33). His wife was his niece Salome, who danced for Herod in exchange for the head of John the Baptist (Mt 14:3-12; Mk 6:17-29).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Herod, Herodian Family.<\/p>\n<li>4. Son of Herod the Great and Mariamne and husband of Salome’s mother, Herodias, who left him to become the mistress of his half brother Herod Antipas. It was for this immoral relationship that John the Baptist rebuked Herod and was later imprisoned and beheaded (Mt 14:3-12; Mk 6:17-29; Lk 3:19-20).<\/li>","summary_ro":"PHILIP 1. Apostle whose name is placed fifth in each of the lists of the twelve after the two pairs of brothers, Simon Peter and Andrew, and James and John (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:14). John says that when John the Baptist bore witness to Jesus with the words, “Behold, the Lamb of God!” two of his disciples began to follow Jesus, and that one of these two was Andrew, who then declared to his brother Simon Peter, “We have found the Messiah,” and brought him to Jesus. (The other unnamed disciple...","summary_en":"PHILIP 1. Apostle whose name is placed fifth in each of the lists of the twelve after the two pairs of brothers, Simon Peter and Andrew, and James and John (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:14). John says that when John the Baptist bore witness to Jesus with the words, “Behold, the Lamb of God!” two of his disciples began to follow Jesus, and that one of these two was Andrew, who then declared to his brother Simon Peter, “We have found the Messiah,” and brought him to Jesus. (The other unnamed disciple...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56427,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:5","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:5<\/strong> <em>Where can we buy bread:<\/em> When the Israelites left Egypt following the first Passover and entered the desert, finding food and water was also their first concern (Exod 15:22–16:3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:5<\/strong> <em>Where can we buy bread:<\/em> When the Israelites left Egypt following the first Passover and entered the desert, finding food and water was also their first concern (Exod 15:22–16:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:5 Where can we buy bread: When the Israelites left Egypt following the first Passover and entered the desert, finding food and water was also their first concern (Exod 15:22–16:3).","summary_en":"6:5 Where can we buy bread: When the Israelites left Egypt following the first Passover and entered the desert, finding food and water was also their first concern (Exod 15:22–16:3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84053,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:5","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:5<\/strong> <em>Where can we buy bread:<\/em> When the Israelites left Egypt following the first Passover and entered the desert, finding food and water was also their first concern (Exod 15:22–16:3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:5<\/strong> <em>Where can we buy bread:<\/em> When the Israelites left Egypt following the first Passover and entered the desert, finding food and water was also their first concern (Exod 15:22–16:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:5 Where can we buy bread: When the Israelites left Egypt following the first Passover and entered the desert, finding food and water was also their first concern (Exod 15:22–16:3).","summary_en":"6:5 Where can we buy bread: When the Israelites left Egypt following the first Passover and entered the desert, finding food and water was also their first concern (Exod 15:22–16:3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111679,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:5","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:5<\/strong> <em>Where can we buy bread:<\/em> When the Israelites left Egypt following the first Passover and entered the desert, finding food and water was also their first concern (Exod 15:22–16:3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:5<\/strong> <em>Where can we buy bread:<\/em> When the Israelites left Egypt following the first Passover and entered the desert, finding food and water was also their first concern (Exod 15:22–16:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:5 Where can we buy bread: When the Israelites left Egypt following the first Passover and entered the desert, finding food and water was also their first concern (Exod 15:22–16:3).","summary_en":"6:5 Where can we buy bread: When the Israelites left Egypt following the first Passover and entered the desert, finding food and water was also their first concern (Exod 15:22–16:3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139305,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:5","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:5","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:5<\/strong> <em>Where can we buy bread:<\/em> When the Israelites left Egypt following the first Passover and entered the desert, finding food and water was also their first concern (Exod 15:22–16:3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:5<\/strong> <em>Where can we buy bread:<\/em> When the Israelites left Egypt following the first Passover and entered the desert, finding food and water was also their first concern (Exod 15:22–16:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:5 Where can we buy bread: When the Israelites left Egypt following the first Passover and entered the desert, finding food and water was also their first concern (Exod 15:22–16:3).","summary_en":"6:5 Where can we buy bread: When the Israelites left Egypt following the first Passover and entered the desert, finding food and water was also their first concern (Exod 15:22–16:3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"7":[{"id":7010,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Coins","title_en":"Coins","content_ro":"<h3>COINS<\/h3>\n<p>Pieces of metal used and accepted as a medium of exchange. A coin has a specific weight and bears some type of authentication to make it easily recognizable. The word “coin” originally referred to a wedge-shaped die or stamp used to “strike” the metal blank. The first coins may have been minted in the late eighth century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Earliest Coins in Palestine<\/p>\n<p>• Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I<\/p>\n<p>• Roman Coins in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EarliestCoinsinPalestine\">Earliest Coins in Palestine<\/p>\n<p>Not until the time of Darius the Great (Darius I of Persia, 521–486 <span>BC<\/span>) did an official government-sponsored coinage become current in Palestine. Those earliest coins were oval-shaped gold darics, along with some silver coins.<\/p>\n<p>“Dram” is another term for the Persian gold daric. It is mentioned in Ezra 2:68-69 (<span>kjv<\/span>), where Zerubbabel’s caravan offered gold darics amounting to $30,000 toward rebuilding the temple. This passage is the first mention of an actual coin in the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>Almost at the same time that the Persian coins became current in Palestine, the widely popular silver tetradrachmas (four-drachma pieces) of Athens began to find their way to the mercantile centers of the Phoenician, Israelite, and Philistine coasts. Archaeologists have unearthed them in hoards throughout the eastern Mediterranean region. They continued to be used through the Persian period, which lasted until the Persian Empire was conquered by Alexander the Great in 334–330 <span>BC<\/span>. The coin was thick and heavy in appearance, but being of high-quality silver, it was in great demand for international commerce. Presumably Greek merchants found they could obtain the most desirable Asiatic imports in exchange for that particular form of currency.<\/p>\n<p>The silver didrachma, or half-drachma, in general use in the Greek Empire from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>, continued through Roman times. After Alexander’s conquests, of course, Greek coins were used throughout the Macedonian Empire from present-day Yugoslavia to Pakistan. They were almost certainly employed for business purposes in Judea, for example.<\/p>\n<p>The shekels of the Phoenician trade centers of Tyre and Sidon, which had contributed substantially to the money supply in the Persian period, continued to be accepted in Judea even after the Alexandrian conquest. Typical of Sidon was a silver shekel portraying the battlements and walls of Sidon’s harbor, with a ship lying at anchor and two prancing lions in the foreground. A typical Tyrian shekel showed the god Baal robed and wearing a tiara. He was riding a hippocamp (winged horse with the tail of a fish) on the sea, with a fish or dolphin beneath. The reverse showed an Egyptian-type owl facing right, plus a shepherd’s crook and flail, both royal insignia in Egypt. The stater (or tetradrachma) found by the disciple Peter in a fish’s mouth and used to pay the temple tax for himself and Jesus may have been a Tyrian coin (Mt 17:27; <span>rsv<\/span> “shekel”).<\/p>\n<p>The talent, which represented a certain weight of gold or silver, was a common medium of exchange before the development of coinage. During the Maccabean period, John Hyrcanus saved the city of Jerusalem from destruction in 133 <span>BC<\/span> by paying a ransom from a 900-year-old hoard stored in David’s sepulcher. Three thousand talents of silver were sent to the Seleucid king Antiochus VII Sidetes in return for his promise to withdraw his troops. Treasure plundered from the temple by the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 66 is recorded as amounting to 17 talents. In gold talents that sum would represent the equivalent of the purchase price of about 15 large houses in a modern Western city.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CoinagefromtheMaccabeestoHerodAgrippaI\">Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I<\/p>\n<p>Even though a native Jewish dynasty assumed the government of the Holy Land, it was many years before any indigenous Jewish coinage was minted. Presumably the inhabitants continued to use the coinage of Tyre and Egypt and of the Seleucid Empire for their commercial transactions. It was formerly supposed that silver shekels bearing images of the chalice and pomegranate cluster dated from the reign of Simon Maccabeus (142–134 <span>BC<\/span>); more recent archaeological discoveries prove that those coins date from the first Jewish revolt (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70).<\/p>\n<p>When the time came to issue the first Jewish coins, the die makers faced several problems. No mint was available, and no local people were skilled in design or die sinking. Coins current in the Near East at that time, which showed a high degree of design and craftsmanship, each bore the portrait head of a ruler or a god. For the Jews to make such coins would have meant contravening the second commandment, “You shall not make for yourself a graven image” (Ex 20:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). Not until well into Roman times was a coin struck in Palestine bearing a portrait head of a Roman emperor.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest coinage of the Hasmonean dynasty (the regnal name of the Maccabees) was the small bronze lepton (plural, lepta) of John Hyrcanus I (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>), son of Simon Maccabeus. The obverse showed two cornucopias with a pomegranate between them. That image symbolized the fertility that God had granted to the land. The reverse contained an inscription within a wreath, “John the high priest and the community of the Jews.” Small bronze lepta from the reign of Alexander Janneus, son of Hyrcanus I, have been found in great numbers. They were evidently much in demand for transactions at the temple, where money changers converted the gentile currency of visiting worshipers into the more acceptable Jewish money. Undoubtedly Hasmonean lepta were the coins Jesus scattered over the pavement of the Court of the Gentiles when he overturned the tables of the money changers (Mt 21:12; Jn 2:15). The lepton, or “mite,” of bronze or copper, worth <span>1<\/span>\/<span>400<\/span> of a shekel, was mentioned by Jesus on another occasion. He praised a widow’s gift of two mites to the temple treasury with the comment that the rich “contributed out of their abundance; but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had, her whole living” (Mk 12:44, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Herod I came to power in Judea under the patronage of Mark Antony and secured the allegiance of the pro-Hasmonean Jews by marrying Mariamne, granddaughter of Hyrcanus II, in 38 <span>BC<\/span>. Herod was empowered to strike his own bronze coins. Although he had a free hand to introduce innovations, Herod’s lepta followed tradition quite faithfully. The lepta carried an anchor with letters meaning “Of King Herod.” The reverse bore the double cornucopias with a pomegranate (or poppy) between them. Herod also minted a large bronze coin with what appears to be a Macedonian helmet on the obverse and a slender tripod on the reverse, along with an inscription of Herod’s name. Other designs he employed included wheat, eagles, and wreaths. He issued no silver coinage, relying instead on the available supplies of silver coins from Tyre, Syria, Asia Minor, Greece, and Rome.<\/p>\n<p>After Herod’s death in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, his son Herod Archelaus assumed control. Lepta from that period bore a hanging cluster of grapes with a Greek inscription, and on the reverse a two-plumed Macedonian helmet. Grapes were an allusion to Israel as the Lord’s vine (Is 5).<\/p>\n<p>When Herod Antipas began his rule, also in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, he had no authority in Judea or Samaria. That portion of the former Jewish kingdom was placed under the control of Roman governors, or procurators, appointed directly by the emperor himself. Most familiar of the Roman procurators of Judea was Pontius Pilate (<span>AD<\/span> 26–36). His bronze coinage showed some bold innovations; his designs included representations of instruments used in the Roman religion such as the augur’s wand (resembling a shepherd’s crook in shape) and a ladle used in connection with broth prepared at sacrifices. The reverse bore a wreath enclosing the regnal date of <span>AD<\/span> 30–31. The two lepta put into the temple treasury (Lk 21:2) could have been lepta issued by Pilate or his predecessor. More likely, however, they were the Hasmonean lepta of Hyrcanus or Janneus, which were free of any taint of pagan Roman influence.<\/p>\n<p>Herod Agrippa I (<span>AD<\/span> 37–44), grandson of Herod the Great, continued the family tradition of ingratiating himself with the Roman overlords. Many of Herod Agrippa’s lepta have been found, showing a conical tasseled umbrella (perhaps symbolizing his royal protection of the people of Palestine) plus a Greek inscription indicating his reign. The reverse showed a bound cluster of three wheat ears and bore the regnal year as the legend.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RomanCoinsinNewTestamentTimes\">Roman Coins in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The Roman “as” came into circulation about 348 <span>BC<\/span> as a bronze coin bearing the figure of an animal. The coin was named after the Roman one-pound weight, equivalent to 12 ounces (340 grams) in our modern system. At the time of Christ’s birth, the Roman “as” minted for use in the Asiatic provinces bore the head of the emperor Augustus, with a laurel wreath on the reverse. A smaller bronze quadrans, or quarter “as,” was also minted by the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>Another bronze coin found in Greek and Roman currency was the assarion, first minted in the first century <span>BC<\/span> but still in use in the Christian period. One type was stamped with a winged sphinx, with an amphora on the reverse. It is still debated whether the coin described as a “farthing” in the <span>kjv<\/span> was in fact a Greek assarion or a Roman “as” or quadrans. The coin is mentioned four times in the NT, most familiarly in the question “Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing?” (see Mt 5:26; 10:29; Mk 12:42; Lk 12:6, <span>rsv<\/span> “penny”). There is no doubt that the <span>kjv<\/span> translators decided to make the coin seem more familiar to their readers by using the name of the smallest copper coin in circulation in England at that time.<\/p>\n<p>The word translated “penny” in the <span>kjv<\/span> is the Greek form of “denarius,” the normal daily wage for a laborer in NT times. In the parable of the laborers in the vineyard, for example, the master agreed to pay each man “a penny” for his day’s work (Mt 20:2, <span>kjv<\/span>; <span>rsv<\/span> “a denarius”). “Two pence” was the amount paid to the innkeeper by the good Samaritan (Lk 10:35, <span>kjv<\/span>). Because of the influence of the Roman denarius on British currency, the English penny has always been represented by the initial letter of its Roman equivalent.<\/p>\n<p>When the denarius, or “penny,” is recognized as a normal day’s wage, the astonishment of Jesus’ disciples when they were expected to find food for 5,000 people is better understood. They exclaimed that “two hundred pennyworth” of food would not feed such a crowd (Jn 6:7, <span>kjv<\/span>); that sum represented more than six months’ work.<\/p>\n<p>As might be expected, the silver and gold coinage current in Palestine during the time of Christ and for the remainder of the first century <span>AD<\/span> came primarily from Rome. The larger silver coins, however, that are referred to as tetradrachmas or staters in the NT came from Egypt, Phoenicia, or Antioch. The silver coin most frequently mentioned in the NT was the Roman denarius or the Greek drachma. Since few drachmas have been found in excavations dating from the first century, it is possible that the term was used in popular speech to refer to the denarius (plural, denarii), which was approximately the same size as the average Greek drachma. Actually, few Greek cities were permitted by their Roman overlords to continue minting drachmas.<\/p>\n<p>Caesar Augustus issued a decree for all the Roman world to be enrolled (Lk 2:1-2) in an empire-wide census just about the time that Jesus was born (6 or 5 <span>BC<\/span>). During his long reign (27 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 14), Augustus authorized a large variety of denarii. They generally carried his likeness on their obverse with the inscription “Augustus, son of the divine one” (that is, son of Julius Caesar, who had been voted divine honors by the Roman Senate).<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew 22:19 Jesus asked those trying to trick him with a question to show him a coin used to pay the government tax. They handed him a denarius bearing the portrait and inscription of Caesar (Mt 22:21). That coin could have been a denarius of Augustus, who had died some 16 years before, or of Tiberius (<span>AD<\/span> 14–37), who was then on the throne. The silver denarius of Tiberius read “Tiberius Caesar Augustus, son of the divine Augustus.” The reverse showed the high priestess of the vestal order, flaming torch in hand, seated on her throne facing right. The title “pontif(ex) maxim(us)” referred to Tiberius rather than to the priestess.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Minerals and Metals; Money; Money Changer.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COINS<\/h3>\n<p>Pieces of metal used and accepted as a medium of exchange. A coin has a specific weight and bears some type of authentication to make it easily recognizable. The word “coin” originally referred to a wedge-shaped die or stamp used to “strike” the metal blank. The first coins may have been minted in the late eighth century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Earliest Coins in Palestine<\/p>\n<p>• Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I<\/p>\n<p>• Roman Coins in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EarliestCoinsinPalestine\">Earliest Coins in Palestine<\/p>\n<p>Not until the time of Darius the Great (Darius I of Persia, 521–486 <span>BC<\/span>) did an official government-sponsored coinage become current in Palestine. Those earliest coins were oval-shaped gold darics, along with some silver coins.<\/p>\n<p>“Dram” is another term for the Persian gold daric. It is mentioned in Ezra 2:68-69 (<span>kjv<\/span>), where Zerubbabel’s caravan offered gold darics amounting to $30,000 toward rebuilding the temple. This passage is the first mention of an actual coin in the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>Almost at the same time that the Persian coins became current in Palestine, the widely popular silver tetradrachmas (four-drachma pieces) of Athens began to find their way to the mercantile centers of the Phoenician, Israelite, and Philistine coasts. Archaeologists have unearthed them in hoards throughout the eastern Mediterranean region. They continued to be used through the Persian period, which lasted until the Persian Empire was conquered by Alexander the Great in 334–330 <span>BC<\/span>. The coin was thick and heavy in appearance, but being of high-quality silver, it was in great demand for international commerce. Presumably Greek merchants found they could obtain the most desirable Asiatic imports in exchange for that particular form of currency.<\/p>\n<p>The silver didrachma, or half-drachma, in general use in the Greek Empire from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>, continued through Roman times. After Alexander’s conquests, of course, Greek coins were used throughout the Macedonian Empire from present-day Yugoslavia to Pakistan. They were almost certainly employed for business purposes in Judea, for example.<\/p>\n<p>The shekels of the Phoenician trade centers of Tyre and Sidon, which had contributed substantially to the money supply in the Persian period, continued to be accepted in Judea even after the Alexandrian conquest. Typical of Sidon was a silver shekel portraying the battlements and walls of Sidon’s harbor, with a ship lying at anchor and two prancing lions in the foreground. A typical Tyrian shekel showed the god Baal robed and wearing a tiara. He was riding a hippocamp (winged horse with the tail of a fish) on the sea, with a fish or dolphin beneath. The reverse showed an Egyptian-type owl facing right, plus a shepherd’s crook and flail, both royal insignia in Egypt. The stater (or tetradrachma) found by the disciple Peter in a fish’s mouth and used to pay the temple tax for himself and Jesus may have been a Tyrian coin (Mt 17:27; <span>rsv<\/span> “shekel”).<\/p>\n<p>The talent, which represented a certain weight of gold or silver, was a common medium of exchange before the development of coinage. During the Maccabean period, John Hyrcanus saved the city of Jerusalem from destruction in 133 <span>BC<\/span> by paying a ransom from a 900-year-old hoard stored in David’s sepulcher. Three thousand talents of silver were sent to the Seleucid king Antiochus VII Sidetes in return for his promise to withdraw his troops. Treasure plundered from the temple by the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 66 is recorded as amounting to 17 talents. In gold talents that sum would represent the equivalent of the purchase price of about 15 large houses in a modern Western city.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CoinagefromtheMaccabeestoHerodAgrippaI\">Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I<\/p>\n<p>Even though a native Jewish dynasty assumed the government of the Holy Land, it was many years before any indigenous Jewish coinage was minted. Presumably the inhabitants continued to use the coinage of Tyre and Egypt and of the Seleucid Empire for their commercial transactions. It was formerly supposed that silver shekels bearing images of the chalice and pomegranate cluster dated from the reign of Simon Maccabeus (142–134 <span>BC<\/span>); more recent archaeological discoveries prove that those coins date from the first Jewish revolt (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70).<\/p>\n<p>When the time came to issue the first Jewish coins, the die makers faced several problems. No mint was available, and no local people were skilled in design or die sinking. Coins current in the Near East at that time, which showed a high degree of design and craftsmanship, each bore the portrait head of a ruler or a god. For the Jews to make such coins would have meant contravening the second commandment, “You shall not make for yourself a graven image” (Ex 20:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). Not until well into Roman times was a coin struck in Palestine bearing a portrait head of a Roman emperor.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest coinage of the Hasmonean dynasty (the regnal name of the Maccabees) was the small bronze lepton (plural, lepta) of John Hyrcanus I (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>), son of Simon Maccabeus. The obverse showed two cornucopias with a pomegranate between them. That image symbolized the fertility that God had granted to the land. The reverse contained an inscription within a wreath, “John the high priest and the community of the Jews.” Small bronze lepta from the reign of Alexander Janneus, son of Hyrcanus I, have been found in great numbers. They were evidently much in demand for transactions at the temple, where money changers converted the gentile currency of visiting worshipers into the more acceptable Jewish money. Undoubtedly Hasmonean lepta were the coins Jesus scattered over the pavement of the Court of the Gentiles when he overturned the tables of the money changers (Mt 21:12; Jn 2:15). The lepton, or “mite,” of bronze or copper, worth <span>1<\/span>\/<span>400<\/span> of a shekel, was mentioned by Jesus on another occasion. He praised a widow’s gift of two mites to the temple treasury with the comment that the rich “contributed out of their abundance; but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had, her whole living” (Mk 12:44, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Herod I came to power in Judea under the patronage of Mark Antony and secured the allegiance of the pro-Hasmonean Jews by marrying Mariamne, granddaughter of Hyrcanus II, in 38 <span>BC<\/span>. Herod was empowered to strike his own bronze coins. Although he had a free hand to introduce innovations, Herod’s lepta followed tradition quite faithfully. The lepta carried an anchor with letters meaning “Of King Herod.” The reverse bore the double cornucopias with a pomegranate (or poppy) between them. Herod also minted a large bronze coin with what appears to be a Macedonian helmet on the obverse and a slender tripod on the reverse, along with an inscription of Herod’s name. Other designs he employed included wheat, eagles, and wreaths. He issued no silver coinage, relying instead on the available supplies of silver coins from Tyre, Syria, Asia Minor, Greece, and Rome.<\/p>\n<p>After Herod’s death in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, his son Herod Archelaus assumed control. Lepta from that period bore a hanging cluster of grapes with a Greek inscription, and on the reverse a two-plumed Macedonian helmet. Grapes were an allusion to Israel as the Lord’s vine (Is 5).<\/p>\n<p>When Herod Antipas began his rule, also in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, he had no authority in Judea or Samaria. That portion of the former Jewish kingdom was placed under the control of Roman governors, or procurators, appointed directly by the emperor himself. Most familiar of the Roman procurators of Judea was Pontius Pilate (<span>AD<\/span> 26–36). His bronze coinage showed some bold innovations; his designs included representations of instruments used in the Roman religion such as the augur’s wand (resembling a shepherd’s crook in shape) and a ladle used in connection with broth prepared at sacrifices. The reverse bore a wreath enclosing the regnal date of <span>AD<\/span> 30–31. The two lepta put into the temple treasury (Lk 21:2) could have been lepta issued by Pilate or his predecessor. More likely, however, they were the Hasmonean lepta of Hyrcanus or Janneus, which were free of any taint of pagan Roman influence.<\/p>\n<p>Herod Agrippa I (<span>AD<\/span> 37–44), grandson of Herod the Great, continued the family tradition of ingratiating himself with the Roman overlords. Many of Herod Agrippa’s lepta have been found, showing a conical tasseled umbrella (perhaps symbolizing his royal protection of the people of Palestine) plus a Greek inscription indicating his reign. The reverse showed a bound cluster of three wheat ears and bore the regnal year as the legend.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RomanCoinsinNewTestamentTimes\">Roman Coins in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The Roman “as” came into circulation about 348 <span>BC<\/span> as a bronze coin bearing the figure of an animal. The coin was named after the Roman one-pound weight, equivalent to 12 ounces (340 grams) in our modern system. At the time of Christ’s birth, the Roman “as” minted for use in the Asiatic provinces bore the head of the emperor Augustus, with a laurel wreath on the reverse. A smaller bronze quadrans, or quarter “as,” was also minted by the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>Another bronze coin found in Greek and Roman currency was the assarion, first minted in the first century <span>BC<\/span> but still in use in the Christian period. One type was stamped with a winged sphinx, with an amphora on the reverse. It is still debated whether the coin described as a “farthing” in the <span>kjv<\/span> was in fact a Greek assarion or a Roman “as” or quadrans. The coin is mentioned four times in the NT, most familiarly in the question “Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing?” (see Mt 5:26; 10:29; Mk 12:42; Lk 12:6, <span>rsv<\/span> “penny”). There is no doubt that the <span>kjv<\/span> translators decided to make the coin seem more familiar to their readers by using the name of the smallest copper coin in circulation in England at that time.<\/p>\n<p>The word translated “penny” in the <span>kjv<\/span> is the Greek form of “denarius,” the normal daily wage for a laborer in NT times. In the parable of the laborers in the vineyard, for example, the master agreed to pay each man “a penny” for his day’s work (Mt 20:2, <span>kjv<\/span>; <span>rsv<\/span> “a denarius”). “Two pence” was the amount paid to the innkeeper by the good Samaritan (Lk 10:35, <span>kjv<\/span>). Because of the influence of the Roman denarius on British currency, the English penny has always been represented by the initial letter of its Roman equivalent.<\/p>\n<p>When the denarius, or “penny,” is recognized as a normal day’s wage, the astonishment of Jesus’ disciples when they were expected to find food for 5,000 people is better understood. They exclaimed that “two hundred pennyworth” of food would not feed such a crowd (Jn 6:7, <span>kjv<\/span>); that sum represented more than six months’ work.<\/p>\n<p>As might be expected, the silver and gold coinage current in Palestine during the time of Christ and for the remainder of the first century <span>AD<\/span> came primarily from Rome. The larger silver coins, however, that are referred to as tetradrachmas or staters in the NT came from Egypt, Phoenicia, or Antioch. The silver coin most frequently mentioned in the NT was the Roman denarius or the Greek drachma. Since few drachmas have been found in excavations dating from the first century, it is possible that the term was used in popular speech to refer to the denarius (plural, denarii), which was approximately the same size as the average Greek drachma. Actually, few Greek cities were permitted by their Roman overlords to continue minting drachmas.<\/p>\n<p>Caesar Augustus issued a decree for all the Roman world to be enrolled (Lk 2:1-2) in an empire-wide census just about the time that Jesus was born (6 or 5 <span>BC<\/span>). During his long reign (27 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 14), Augustus authorized a large variety of denarii. They generally carried his likeness on their obverse with the inscription “Augustus, son of the divine one” (that is, son of Julius Caesar, who had been voted divine honors by the Roman Senate).<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew 22:19 Jesus asked those trying to trick him with a question to show him a coin used to pay the government tax. They handed him a denarius bearing the portrait and inscription of Caesar (Mt 22:21). That coin could have been a denarius of Augustus, who had died some 16 years before, or of Tiberius (<span>AD<\/span> 14–37), who was then on the throne. The silver denarius of Tiberius read “Tiberius Caesar Augustus, son of the divine Augustus.” The reverse showed the high priestess of the vestal order, flaming torch in hand, seated on her throne facing right. The title “pontif(ex) maxim(us)” referred to Tiberius rather than to the priestess.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Minerals and Metals; Money; Money Changer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COINS Pieces of metal used and accepted as a medium of exchange. A coin has a specific weight and bears some type of authentication to make it easily recognizable. The word “coin” originally referred to a wedge-shaped die or stamp used to “strike” the metal blank. The first coins may have been minted in the late eighth century BC. Preview • Earliest Coins in Palestine • Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I • Roman Coins in New Testament Times Earliest Coins in Palestine Not until the...","summary_en":"COINS Pieces of metal used and accepted as a medium of exchange. A coin has a specific weight and bears some type of authentication to make it easily recognizable. The word “coin” originally referred to a wedge-shaped die or stamp used to “strike” the metal blank. The first coins may have been minted in the late eighth century BC. Preview • Earliest Coins in Palestine • Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I • Roman Coins in New Testament Times Earliest Coins in Palestine Not until the...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":26022,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Miracle","title_en":"Miracle","content_ro":"<h3>MIRACLE<\/h3>\n<p>A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scripture the element of faith is crucial; a natural approach cannot prove or disprove the presence of “miracle.” The timing and content of the process can be miraculous, even though the event may seem natural. The revelatory significance is also important. In every case God performed the miracle not merely as a “wonder” to inspire awe but as a “sign” to draw people to himself.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheVocabularyofMiracles\">The Vocabulary of Miracles<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the two main terms are “sign” and “wonder,” which often occur together (e.g., nine times in Dt alone, 4:34; 13:1; etc.). More than one Hebrew term is used for “wonder”—one referring to it as an act of supernatural power and another as being beyond man’s understanding. On the whole, they are used synonymously for God’s providential acts within history. The “sign” refers to an act that occurs as a token or pledge of God’s control over events and as a revelation of God’s presence with his people.<\/p>\n<p>The NT uses the same basic idiom, “signs and wonders,” with the same general thrust (cf. Mt 24:24; Mk 13:22; Jn 4:48; Acts 2:43). A third term is that for “power” or miracle, and this becomes the predominant term in the synoptic Gospels. It signifies the mighty act itself by which God is revealed in Christ. A fourth term is “work,” which along with “sign” is preferred in the Gospel of John. This term is used in John to show that in Jesus the work of the Father is revealed. While the terms are often synonymous (the first three occur together in Rom 15:19-20; 2 Thes 2:9; Heb 2:4), they designate three different aspects of miracles. “Signs” point to the theological meaning of miracle as a revelation of God; “power,” to the force behind the act; “work,” to the person behind it; and “wonder,” to its awesome effect on the observer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheOldTestament\">Miracles in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>To the Hebrew, a miracle was nothing more nor less than an act of God. Therefore, nature herself was a miracle (Jb 5:9-10; Pss 89:6; 106:2), and an act of kindness or victory over one’s enemies is so described (Gn 24:12-27; 1 Sm 14:23). The natural order is totally under Yahweh’s control, so a miracle was observable not because of its supernatural nature but because of its character as part of the divine revelation. This connection with salvation history is crucial, for Israel at all times tried to guard against a desire for the spectacular. Deuteronomy 13:1-4 warns against accepting a wonder as authenticating a prophet; rather, the authentication must come from the fact that he worships Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles in the OT are restricted to critical periods of redemptive history. Many have discussed the act of Creation as the first miracle, but in actuality it is not presented as such in the Genesis account. A miracle is signified by its revelatory significance and\/or its connection with crucial points in the history of God’s people—the exodus, the conquest of Jordan, the battle against the insidious Baal worship of the prophetic period. Creation is characterized by one major theme: a chronicle of the beginnings. The miracles of Genesis—striking blind the inhabitants of Sodom, the Flood, Babel—all signify the wrath of God upon those who have turned against him. This is the other side of redemptive history, the judgment of God upon those who are not his people.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles of the exodus account have two foci: The plagues represent the absolute power of Yahweh over the gods of Egypt, and the miracles of the wilderness show God’s absolute care and protection of his people. The plagues are particularly interesting because each one is directed at one of the gods of Egypt and reveals Yahweh as the only potentate. The basic theme is found in Exodus 7:5 and is repeated throughout the account (cf. 7:17; 8:6, 18; 9:14-16, 29; 12:12): “When I show the Egyptians my power and force them to let the Israelites go, they will realize that I am the <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In this regard they were directed not only at the Egyptians but also to the Israelites, who needed to know that their God would vindicate them against the Egyptians. This is borne out in the major miracle, the crossing of the Red Sea. The plagues themselves show a gradual increase in severity.<\/p>\n<p>The wilderness miracles are intimately connected to the basic theme of the wandering narratives, the trial of Israel in times of desperate need and God’s providential protection of his people when they turn to him. The basic organization of the stories concerns the need itself, which leads to Israel’s complaint; this is followed by Moses’ intercession and then by God’s sovereign intervention. The miracles are interspersed with other stories that tell of God’s punishment when the people’s murmuring tries him too far. The miracle is God’s self-revelation regarding his involvement in the needs of his own; Israel must then respond, and her response determines her blessing or punishment at the hands of Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are conspicuously absent in the period of the united monarchy. This was a time of self-sufficiency, when God worked through the monarchy and did not intervene directly in the life of the nation. The reason is that Israel’s eschatological hopes had been realized and made concrete in the presence of the Holy City and the temple.<\/p>\n<p>It was different during the prophetic period. In the lives of Elijah and Elisha, miracles were predominant. This was a time of apostasy, and under the reign of Ahab and Jezebel the nation turned to paganism and the worship of Baal. The very existence of the Hebraic religion seemed to be threatened, and so the times called for extraordinary measures. Here the wondrous nature of the miracles is more evident than anywhere else in the OT. There are conscious allusions to the exodus miracles, perhaps looking to Elijah as a new Moses reinstituting the true worship of Yahweh. Parallels are seen in the challenge to the priests of Baal (1 Kgs 18; cf. Ex 7); the revelation of God on Mt Horeb with the wind, earthquake, and fire (1 Kgs 19; cf. Ex 19); and the parting of the Jordan (2 Kgs 2:10-14; cf. Ex 14). Many of the miracles were intended to demonstrate the impotence of Baal, such as the drought, the contest on Mt Carmel, and the miraculous sustenance supplied by God. Again, God’s actions within history were part of his self-revelation, the vindication of his messengers, and the punishment of his enemies.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are infrequent in the writing prophets, perhaps due to the proclamation form of the writings (i.e., they dealt with message rather than deeds). The two major exceptions (apart from the recovery of Hezekiah chronicled in Is 38) are Jonah and Daniel. In Jonah, the miracle is addressed not to the Ninevites but to the Israelites, who are called back to their covenant obligations as the spokesmen for Yahweh. In Daniel the direction is reversed, and the situation is the same as that in Exodus or Kings. The miracles are directed to the Babylonians and Persians and have the same foci as the earlier events of the exodus and Elijah-Elisha chronicles, that is, the supremacy of Yahweh over the foreign gods and the vindication of his messengers. This is the third and final time of crisis and illustrates the major theological use of miracles in the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheNewTestament\">Miracles in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the miraculous has a similar purpose in the NT; it occurred at a crisis point in salvation history to authenticate the presence of God in historical acts. It differs, however, in that it is transcended by the presence of the very Son of God, who himself is the greatest miracle of all. God now has not only acted in history; he has entered history and has turned it to himself. The parallels with the exodus events are obvious and show that the miracles of Jesus paved the way for the entrance of the new covenant in the same way that the exodus miracles prepared for the old.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Jesus’ Understanding<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus stressed the connection between his miraculous ministry, especially the casting out of demons (exorcism), and the coming of the kingdom of God. As in the OT, the miracles signify the presence of God, but here it is more direct and also signals the inauguration of his kingdom (Mt 12:28). As such, then, the exorcism miracles mean the binding of Satan and the institution of the reign of God (Mk 3:23-27). At the same time all the miracles signify the dawning of the age of salvation, as expressed in Jesus’ inaugural address at Nazareth (Lk 4:18-21, from Is 61:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Yet these miracles are not automatic signposts to the act of God; they must be interpreted by faith. Jesus was well aware of the presence of other miracles in his day (Mt 12:27) and so stressed the presence of faith in the healing miracles (Mk 5:32; 10:52). This faith must be directed to the presence of God in the event and in Jesus himself. The necessity of faith also helps to understand Jesus’ refusal to provide his contemporaries with a “sign” (Mk 8:11-12); miracles could never “prove” the presence of God. For a better understanding of the connection between faith and miracles, it is best to note each Evangelist’s individual portrait of the theological use of miracles.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Mark<\/h5>\n<p>Mark, the first of the four Gospels to be written, has often been called the “action Gospel” because of its emphasis on Jesus’ deeds rather than his teaching. This is also true regarding Jesus’ miracles, for Mark contains more proportionately than any of the others. There are five groups or five kinds of miracles in Mark. The first group centers on Jesus’ authority over demons (Mk 1:21-39). The second concerns Jesus’ authority over the law and conflict with his opponents (1:40–3:6). They result in fame but occasion his refusal to allow his true identity as Son of God to be known. The third group (3:7-30) contains exorcisms and the Beelzebub controversy, centering on his power over Satan. The fourth group (4:35–6:43) contains especially powerful miracles (stilling the storm, the Gaderene demoniac, the raising of Jairus’s daughter) and probably centers on the disciples, as Jesus thereby reveals to them the meaning of the kingdom and seeks to overcome their own spiritual dullness. The fifth and final group (6:30–8:26) continues the theme of the disciples’ misunderstanding and prepares the way for the Passion, with the message regarding the bread, blindness, and the judgment of God.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles in Mark center on conflict, first with Jesus’ opponents and then with his own disciples. While the miracles are harbingers of God’s kingdom, their purpose is to force an encounter with Jesus’ true significance. They do not show Jesus as a Hellenistic wonder worker; in fact, they lead only to amazement and then disbelief in those who do not have faith. Jesus’ personhood has been hidden and can only be understood in light of the cross. The miracles are not proofs but powers; God does not authenticate himself through them but shows himself to those with eyes to see.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Matthew<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s is the teaching Gospel, where dialogue takes precedence over action. Matthew compresses Mark’s narrative in order to make room for didactic material. Therefore, his stress is on the theological implications of faith rather than on the results they contain. Matthew’s groups of miracles are isometric to teaching passages, in keeping with his general practice of combining narrative portions and organizing them around didactic sections. The first group (chs 8–9) combines miracles from Mark’s first, second, and fourth groups and stresses Jesus’ significance as the servant of Yahweh who exercises sovereign power and forgives sins. The secondary theme teaches discipleship and shows the awakening faith of the disciples and their involvement in Jesus’ ministry. The second group (ch 12) centers on his authority over the law (the man with the withered hand) and over Satan (the Beelzebub controversy). The third group (chs 14–15) parallels Mark’s fifth group but has a different purpose. Rather than arousing conflict, the disciples are seen in positive guise, actively involved in the Master’s work. So the disciples become the means by which Jesus’ ministry is continued. Therefore, the disciples are involved as “learners” (the meaning of “disciple”) in his miraculous ministry.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Luke<\/h5>\n<p>Luke-Acts is remarkable and extremely important because it establishes beyond dispute the early church’s belief that it was in absolute continuity with Jesus and was continuing the work of God in the world. Luke’s major stress is on salvation history, and so one of his major stylistic methods for showing this direct connection is miraculous deeds. Especially enlightening here is Acts 9:32-42, where in two healing miracles Peter duplicated the Lord’s miracles (the paralytic Aeneas, Lk 5:18-26; the raising of Dorcas, Lk 8:49-56).<\/p>\n<p>From this respect also Luke returns to Mark’s interest in the deed more than the teaching. However, Luke goes even further than Mark, for the miracles validate Jesus more directly. The first group follows the inaugural address (4:18-22), which itself presents the miraculous deeds as authenticating signposts to Jesus’ personhood. They center on Jesus’ power and authority (vv 31-41) and validate God’s power in Jesus (5:17; 8:39) as well as faith in Jesus (seen in the “praise” motif, 5:25; 7:16; etc., but especially in Acts 9:35; 13:12; 19:17). The presence of “fear” at the miracles is a human response to having witnessed God’s power (Lk 5:26; 7:16; 8:35-37; 24:5). The call to the disciples occurs in the presence of miracles (5:1-11, at the miraculous catch of fish; vv 27-28, after the healing of the bedridden paralytic).<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, Luke views miracles as having redemptive significance. However, this is not contrary to Mark’s picture. Luke still avoids picturing Jesus as a mere wonder worker; Jesus still refuses to satisfy people’s curiosity for an external sign (Lk 11:29-32; cf. also 9:9), and in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (16:19-31) he teaches that the unbelieving heart can never be convinced by such events. Nevertheless, they can lead to repentance (10:13-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in John<\/h5>\n<p>John is the most directly theological of the Evangelists, and miracles are characteristically given a distinctive Johannine coloring. In the Synoptics, miracles are “acts of power” signifying the entrance of God’s reign into this world via Jesus; thereby, Jesus establishes Satan’s defeat and God’s sovereign control of history. John, however, contains no exorcisms, and the miracles are seen as “signs.” At the same time miracles are part of the larger category of “works” (the other term for miracles used in John), by which Jesus shows the Father’s presence in himself (Jn 10:32, 37-39; 14:10) and they give witness to Jesus as the sent one (5:36; 10:25, 38).<\/p>\n<p>John selects only seven “sign miracles” from many others (20:30) and uses them as part of the thematic development in the respective section of each. For instance, changing the water into wine is a messianic act, signifying the outpouring of the kingdom blessing in the ministry of Jesus, the Messiah (ch 2); the multiplication of the loaves builds upon the “bread of life” and points to the messianic banquet as spiritually present in Jesus (ch 6).<\/p>\n<p>The paradoxical nature of miracles in the Synoptics is even greater in John. He gives more stress to the wondrous nature of the events by providing such details as the stupendous amount of water changed into wine (2:6, approximately 120 gallons, or 454.2 liters); the distance over which Jesus’ healing power works (4:46, almost 20 miles, or 32.2 kilometers); the length of time the man of Bethesda had been lame (5:5, 38 years; cf. 9:1, where the man had been born blind); the amount of bread needed to feed the 5,000 (6:7, where Philip said 200 denarii, or days’ wages, would not have bought enough); and the proof of Lazarus’s death (11:39; he had already begun to decay). John has a great interest in the miraculous. Yet at the same time there is even greater stress on the inadequacy of miracles for faith. The miracles as “signs” have saving value and point to the true significance of Jesus but are related to an awakening faith and in themselves are insufficient (2:11; 4:50). They have christological force, looking to Jesus’ sonship and the Father’s authentication of him but are based on the soteriological decision of the individual. As “signs,” they contain the very presence of God in Jesus, the spiritual reality of the “sight” and “life” he brings (9:35-38; 11:24-26). Yet their purpose is to divide the audience and confront it with the necessity of decision. Two camps result—those seeking understanding and those considering only the outward aspects. Some refuse to consider the signs, and thus they reject them (3:18-21; 11:47-50), while others see them shallowly as mere wonders and fail to see in them the true significance of Jesus (2:23-25; 4:45). On the other hand, some view them with the eye of faith and go on to a realization of his personhood (2:11; 5:36-46; 11:42). In John the highest faith of all is that which does not need external stimulation (20:29).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in the Rest of the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>Apart from Acts, several passages in the NT speak of the value of miracles. Paul in 2 Corinthians 12:12 and Romans 15:18-19 considered them as “sign-gifts,” which authenticated the divine authority of the “true apostle.” He listed healing and miracles as specific “gifts of the Spirit” in 1 Corinthians 12:9-10. In Galatians 3:5 he considered them evidence for the presence of the Spirit. The author of the letter to the Hebrews in 2:4 said “God bore witness” to the true message of salvation via miracles. Therefore, in the apostolic age the miracles of God’s servants were seen more directly as authenticating signs of God’s action in his messengers.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Sign; Spiritual Gifts.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MIRACLE<\/h3>\n<p>A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scripture the element of faith is crucial; a natural approach cannot prove or disprove the presence of “miracle.” The timing and content of the process can be miraculous, even though the event may seem natural. The revelatory significance is also important. In every case God performed the miracle not merely as a “wonder” to inspire awe but as a “sign” to draw people to himself.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheVocabularyofMiracles\">The Vocabulary of Miracles<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the two main terms are “sign” and “wonder,” which often occur together (e.g., nine times in Dt alone, 4:34; 13:1; etc.). More than one Hebrew term is used for “wonder”—one referring to it as an act of supernatural power and another as being beyond man’s understanding. On the whole, they are used synonymously for God’s providential acts within history. The “sign” refers to an act that occurs as a token or pledge of God’s control over events and as a revelation of God’s presence with his people.<\/p>\n<p>The NT uses the same basic idiom, “signs and wonders,” with the same general thrust (cf. Mt 24:24; Mk 13:22; Jn 4:48; Acts 2:43). A third term is that for “power” or miracle, and this becomes the predominant term in the synoptic Gospels. It signifies the mighty act itself by which God is revealed in Christ. A fourth term is “work,” which along with “sign” is preferred in the Gospel of John. This term is used in John to show that in Jesus the work of the Father is revealed. While the terms are often synonymous (the first three occur together in Rom 15:19-20; 2 Thes 2:9; Heb 2:4), they designate three different aspects of miracles. “Signs” point to the theological meaning of miracle as a revelation of God; “power,” to the force behind the act; “work,” to the person behind it; and “wonder,” to its awesome effect on the observer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheOldTestament\">Miracles in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>To the Hebrew, a miracle was nothing more nor less than an act of God. Therefore, nature herself was a miracle (Jb 5:9-10; Pss 89:6; 106:2), and an act of kindness or victory over one’s enemies is so described (Gn 24:12-27; 1 Sm 14:23). The natural order is totally under Yahweh’s control, so a miracle was observable not because of its supernatural nature but because of its character as part of the divine revelation. This connection with salvation history is crucial, for Israel at all times tried to guard against a desire for the spectacular. Deuteronomy 13:1-4 warns against accepting a wonder as authenticating a prophet; rather, the authentication must come from the fact that he worships Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles in the OT are restricted to critical periods of redemptive history. Many have discussed the act of Creation as the first miracle, but in actuality it is not presented as such in the Genesis account. A miracle is signified by its revelatory significance and\/or its connection with crucial points in the history of God’s people—the exodus, the conquest of Jordan, the battle against the insidious Baal worship of the prophetic period. Creation is characterized by one major theme: a chronicle of the beginnings. The miracles of Genesis—striking blind the inhabitants of Sodom, the Flood, Babel—all signify the wrath of God upon those who have turned against him. This is the other side of redemptive history, the judgment of God upon those who are not his people.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles of the exodus account have two foci: The plagues represent the absolute power of Yahweh over the gods of Egypt, and the miracles of the wilderness show God’s absolute care and protection of his people. The plagues are particularly interesting because each one is directed at one of the gods of Egypt and reveals Yahweh as the only potentate. The basic theme is found in Exodus 7:5 and is repeated throughout the account (cf. 7:17; 8:6, 18; 9:14-16, 29; 12:12): “When I show the Egyptians my power and force them to let the Israelites go, they will realize that I am the <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In this regard they were directed not only at the Egyptians but also to the Israelites, who needed to know that their God would vindicate them against the Egyptians. This is borne out in the major miracle, the crossing of the Red Sea. The plagues themselves show a gradual increase in severity.<\/p>\n<p>The wilderness miracles are intimately connected to the basic theme of the wandering narratives, the trial of Israel in times of desperate need and God’s providential protection of his people when they turn to him. The basic organization of the stories concerns the need itself, which leads to Israel’s complaint; this is followed by Moses’ intercession and then by God’s sovereign intervention. The miracles are interspersed with other stories that tell of God’s punishment when the people’s murmuring tries him too far. The miracle is God’s self-revelation regarding his involvement in the needs of his own; Israel must then respond, and her response determines her blessing or punishment at the hands of Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are conspicuously absent in the period of the united monarchy. This was a time of self-sufficiency, when God worked through the monarchy and did not intervene directly in the life of the nation. The reason is that Israel’s eschatological hopes had been realized and made concrete in the presence of the Holy City and the temple.<\/p>\n<p>It was different during the prophetic period. In the lives of Elijah and Elisha, miracles were predominant. This was a time of apostasy, and under the reign of Ahab and Jezebel the nation turned to paganism and the worship of Baal. The very existence of the Hebraic religion seemed to be threatened, and so the times called for extraordinary measures. Here the wondrous nature of the miracles is more evident than anywhere else in the OT. There are conscious allusions to the exodus miracles, perhaps looking to Elijah as a new Moses reinstituting the true worship of Yahweh. Parallels are seen in the challenge to the priests of Baal (1 Kgs 18; cf. Ex 7); the revelation of God on Mt Horeb with the wind, earthquake, and fire (1 Kgs 19; cf. Ex 19); and the parting of the Jordan (2 Kgs 2:10-14; cf. Ex 14). Many of the miracles were intended to demonstrate the impotence of Baal, such as the drought, the contest on Mt Carmel, and the miraculous sustenance supplied by God. Again, God’s actions within history were part of his self-revelation, the vindication of his messengers, and the punishment of his enemies.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are infrequent in the writing prophets, perhaps due to the proclamation form of the writings (i.e., they dealt with message rather than deeds). The two major exceptions (apart from the recovery of Hezekiah chronicled in Is 38) are Jonah and Daniel. In Jonah, the miracle is addressed not to the Ninevites but to the Israelites, who are called back to their covenant obligations as the spokesmen for Yahweh. In Daniel the direction is reversed, and the situation is the same as that in Exodus or Kings. The miracles are directed to the Babylonians and Persians and have the same foci as the earlier events of the exodus and Elijah-Elisha chronicles, that is, the supremacy of Yahweh over the foreign gods and the vindication of his messengers. This is the third and final time of crisis and illustrates the major theological use of miracles in the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheNewTestament\">Miracles in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the miraculous has a similar purpose in the NT; it occurred at a crisis point in salvation history to authenticate the presence of God in historical acts. It differs, however, in that it is transcended by the presence of the very Son of God, who himself is the greatest miracle of all. God now has not only acted in history; he has entered history and has turned it to himself. The parallels with the exodus events are obvious and show that the miracles of Jesus paved the way for the entrance of the new covenant in the same way that the exodus miracles prepared for the old.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Jesus’ Understanding<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus stressed the connection between his miraculous ministry, especially the casting out of demons (exorcism), and the coming of the kingdom of God. As in the OT, the miracles signify the presence of God, but here it is more direct and also signals the inauguration of his kingdom (Mt 12:28). As such, then, the exorcism miracles mean the binding of Satan and the institution of the reign of God (Mk 3:23-27). At the same time all the miracles signify the dawning of the age of salvation, as expressed in Jesus’ inaugural address at Nazareth (Lk 4:18-21, from Is 61:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Yet these miracles are not automatic signposts to the act of God; they must be interpreted by faith. Jesus was well aware of the presence of other miracles in his day (Mt 12:27) and so stressed the presence of faith in the healing miracles (Mk 5:32; 10:52). This faith must be directed to the presence of God in the event and in Jesus himself. The necessity of faith also helps to understand Jesus’ refusal to provide his contemporaries with a “sign” (Mk 8:11-12); miracles could never “prove” the presence of God. For a better understanding of the connection between faith and miracles, it is best to note each Evangelist’s individual portrait of the theological use of miracles.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Mark<\/h5>\n<p>Mark, the first of the four Gospels to be written, has often been called the “action Gospel” because of its emphasis on Jesus’ deeds rather than his teaching. This is also true regarding Jesus’ miracles, for Mark contains more proportionately than any of the others. There are five groups or five kinds of miracles in Mark. The first group centers on Jesus’ authority over demons (Mk 1:21-39). The second concerns Jesus’ authority over the law and conflict with his opponents (1:40–3:6). They result in fame but occasion his refusal to allow his true identity as Son of God to be known. The third group (3:7-30) contains exorcisms and the Beelzebub controversy, centering on his power over Satan. The fourth group (4:35–6:43) contains especially powerful miracles (stilling the storm, the Gaderene demoniac, the raising of Jairus’s daughter) and probably centers on the disciples, as Jesus thereby reveals to them the meaning of the kingdom and seeks to overcome their own spiritual dullness. The fifth and final group (6:30–8:26) continues the theme of the disciples’ misunderstanding and prepares the way for the Passion, with the message regarding the bread, blindness, and the judgment of God.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles in Mark center on conflict, first with Jesus’ opponents and then with his own disciples. While the miracles are harbingers of God’s kingdom, their purpose is to force an encounter with Jesus’ true significance. They do not show Jesus as a Hellenistic wonder worker; in fact, they lead only to amazement and then disbelief in those who do not have faith. Jesus’ personhood has been hidden and can only be understood in light of the cross. The miracles are not proofs but powers; God does not authenticate himself through them but shows himself to those with eyes to see.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Matthew<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s is the teaching Gospel, where dialogue takes precedence over action. Matthew compresses Mark’s narrative in order to make room for didactic material. Therefore, his stress is on the theological implications of faith rather than on the results they contain. Matthew’s groups of miracles are isometric to teaching passages, in keeping with his general practice of combining narrative portions and organizing them around didactic sections. The first group (chs 8–9) combines miracles from Mark’s first, second, and fourth groups and stresses Jesus’ significance as the servant of Yahweh who exercises sovereign power and forgives sins. The secondary theme teaches discipleship and shows the awakening faith of the disciples and their involvement in Jesus’ ministry. The second group (ch 12) centers on his authority over the law (the man with the withered hand) and over Satan (the Beelzebub controversy). The third group (chs 14–15) parallels Mark’s fifth group but has a different purpose. Rather than arousing conflict, the disciples are seen in positive guise, actively involved in the Master’s work. So the disciples become the means by which Jesus’ ministry is continued. Therefore, the disciples are involved as “learners” (the meaning of “disciple”) in his miraculous ministry.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Luke<\/h5>\n<p>Luke-Acts is remarkable and extremely important because it establishes beyond dispute the early church’s belief that it was in absolute continuity with Jesus and was continuing the work of God in the world. Luke’s major stress is on salvation history, and so one of his major stylistic methods for showing this direct connection is miraculous deeds. Especially enlightening here is Acts 9:32-42, where in two healing miracles Peter duplicated the Lord’s miracles (the paralytic Aeneas, Lk 5:18-26; the raising of Dorcas, Lk 8:49-56).<\/p>\n<p>From this respect also Luke returns to Mark’s interest in the deed more than the teaching. However, Luke goes even further than Mark, for the miracles validate Jesus more directly. The first group follows the inaugural address (4:18-22), which itself presents the miraculous deeds as authenticating signposts to Jesus’ personhood. They center on Jesus’ power and authority (vv 31-41) and validate God’s power in Jesus (5:17; 8:39) as well as faith in Jesus (seen in the “praise” motif, 5:25; 7:16; etc., but especially in Acts 9:35; 13:12; 19:17). The presence of “fear” at the miracles is a human response to having witnessed God’s power (Lk 5:26; 7:16; 8:35-37; 24:5). The call to the disciples occurs in the presence of miracles (5:1-11, at the miraculous catch of fish; vv 27-28, after the healing of the bedridden paralytic).<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, Luke views miracles as having redemptive significance. However, this is not contrary to Mark’s picture. Luke still avoids picturing Jesus as a mere wonder worker; Jesus still refuses to satisfy people’s curiosity for an external sign (Lk 11:29-32; cf. also 9:9), and in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (16:19-31) he teaches that the unbelieving heart can never be convinced by such events. Nevertheless, they can lead to repentance (10:13-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in John<\/h5>\n<p>John is the most directly theological of the Evangelists, and miracles are characteristically given a distinctive Johannine coloring. In the Synoptics, miracles are “acts of power” signifying the entrance of God’s reign into this world via Jesus; thereby, Jesus establishes Satan’s defeat and God’s sovereign control of history. John, however, contains no exorcisms, and the miracles are seen as “signs.” At the same time miracles are part of the larger category of “works” (the other term for miracles used in John), by which Jesus shows the Father’s presence in himself (Jn 10:32, 37-39; 14:10) and they give witness to Jesus as the sent one (5:36; 10:25, 38).<\/p>\n<p>John selects only seven “sign miracles” from many others (20:30) and uses them as part of the thematic development in the respective section of each. For instance, changing the water into wine is a messianic act, signifying the outpouring of the kingdom blessing in the ministry of Jesus, the Messiah (ch 2); the multiplication of the loaves builds upon the “bread of life” and points to the messianic banquet as spiritually present in Jesus (ch 6).<\/p>\n<p>The paradoxical nature of miracles in the Synoptics is even greater in John. He gives more stress to the wondrous nature of the events by providing such details as the stupendous amount of water changed into wine (2:6, approximately 120 gallons, or 454.2 liters); the distance over which Jesus’ healing power works (4:46, almost 20 miles, or 32.2 kilometers); the length of time the man of Bethesda had been lame (5:5, 38 years; cf. 9:1, where the man had been born blind); the amount of bread needed to feed the 5,000 (6:7, where Philip said 200 denarii, or days’ wages, would not have bought enough); and the proof of Lazarus’s death (11:39; he had already begun to decay). John has a great interest in the miraculous. Yet at the same time there is even greater stress on the inadequacy of miracles for faith. The miracles as “signs” have saving value and point to the true significance of Jesus but are related to an awakening faith and in themselves are insufficient (2:11; 4:50). They have christological force, looking to Jesus’ sonship and the Father’s authentication of him but are based on the soteriological decision of the individual. As “signs,” they contain the very presence of God in Jesus, the spiritual reality of the “sight” and “life” he brings (9:35-38; 11:24-26). Yet their purpose is to divide the audience and confront it with the necessity of decision. Two camps result—those seeking understanding and those considering only the outward aspects. Some refuse to consider the signs, and thus they reject them (3:18-21; 11:47-50), while others see them shallowly as mere wonders and fail to see in them the true significance of Jesus (2:23-25; 4:45). On the other hand, some view them with the eye of faith and go on to a realization of his personhood (2:11; 5:36-46; 11:42). In John the highest faith of all is that which does not need external stimulation (20:29).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in the Rest of the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>Apart from Acts, several passages in the NT speak of the value of miracles. Paul in 2 Corinthians 12:12 and Romans 15:18-19 considered them as “sign-gifts,” which authenticated the divine authority of the “true apostle.” He listed healing and miracles as specific “gifts of the Spirit” in 1 Corinthians 12:9-10. In Galatians 3:5 he considered them evidence for the presence of the Spirit. The author of the letter to the Hebrews in 2:4 said “God bore witness” to the true message of salvation via miracles. Therefore, in the apostolic age the miracles of God’s servants were seen more directly as authenticating signs of God’s action in his messengers.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Sign; Spiritual Gifts.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MIRACLE A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scri...","summary_en":"MIRACLE A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scri...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":42179,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69805,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97431,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125057,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":1586,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Andrew, the Apostle","title_en":"Andrew, the Apostle","content_ro":"<h3>ANDREW, T<span>he<\/span> A<span>postle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came into prominence. Whenever the relationship of the two is mentioned, Andrew is always described as the brother of Simon Peter and never the other way around (Mt 4:18; Mk 1:16; Jn 1:40; 6:8), although Andrew is also mentioned without reference to his relationship to Peter (Mk 1:29; 3:18; 13:3; Jn 12:22). Andrew’s father was John (Mt 16:17; Jn 1:42; 21:15-17), and his hometown was Bethsaida (Jn 1:44), a village on the north shore of the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John mentions disciples being with Jesus (2:2; 4:2), and it is likely that Andrew was one of that early group. Evidently, however, he returned to his activity as a fisherman on the Sea of Galilee, where he shared a house with Peter and his family in Capernaum (Mt 4:18-20; Mk 1:16-18, 29-33). While they were fishing, Andrew and Peter received a definite call to follow Jesus and become those who fish for people. From among the disciples of Jesus a group of 12 were later specially chosen as apostles. Andrew is always listed among the first four named, along with Peter and two other brothers, John and James (Mt 10:2-4; Lk 6:13-16; Acts 1:13).<\/p>\n<p>Andrew is named in only three other contexts in the Gospels. At the feeding of the 5,000 he called attention to the boy who had five barley loaves and two fish (Jn 6:8-9). When certain Greeks came to Philip, asking to see Jesus, Philip told Andrew and then the two of them told Jesus (Jn 12:20-22). Finally, Andrew is listed among those who were questioning Jesus privately on the Mt of Olives (Mk 13:3-4). The last NT mention of Andrew is in the list of apostles waiting in the upper room in Jerusalem for the promised outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:12-14).<\/p>\n<p>Various documents associated with Andrew, such as the Acts of Andrew mentioned by the early church historian Eusebius, are of doubtful value. Some traditions indicate that Andrew ministered in Scythia. According to the Muratorian Canon, Andrew received a revelation at night that the apostle John should write the fourth Gospel. Tradition is rather uniform that Andrew died at Patrae in Achaia. A story developed that he was martyred on an X-shaped cross (a “decussate” or “saltire” cross), which has become known as St Andrew’s Cross. Another tradition is that an arm of the dead Andrew was taken into Scotland as a relic by Regulus, and thus Andrew became known as a patron saint of Scotland. On the calendar of saints of the Roman and Greek churches, Andrew’s date is set as November 30. <em>See<\/em> Apocrypha (Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings): Andrew, Acts of; Andrew, Story of; Andrew and Matthias, Acts of; Andrew and Paul, Acts of.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ANDREW, T<span>he<\/span> A<span>postle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came into prominence. Whenever the relationship of the two is mentioned, Andrew is always described as the brother of Simon Peter and never the other way around (Mt 4:18; Mk 1:16; Jn 1:40; 6:8), although Andrew is also mentioned without reference to his relationship to Peter (Mk 1:29; 3:18; 13:3; Jn 12:22). Andrew’s father was John (Mt 16:17; Jn 1:42; 21:15-17), and his hometown was Bethsaida (Jn 1:44), a village on the north shore of the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John mentions disciples being with Jesus (2:2; 4:2), and it is likely that Andrew was one of that early group. Evidently, however, he returned to his activity as a fisherman on the Sea of Galilee, where he shared a house with Peter and his family in Capernaum (Mt 4:18-20; Mk 1:16-18, 29-33). While they were fishing, Andrew and Peter received a definite call to follow Jesus and become those who fish for people. From among the disciples of Jesus a group of 12 were later specially chosen as apostles. Andrew is always listed among the first four named, along with Peter and two other brothers, John and James (Mt 10:2-4; Lk 6:13-16; Acts 1:13).<\/p>\n<p>Andrew is named in only three other contexts in the Gospels. At the feeding of the 5,000 he called attention to the boy who had five barley loaves and two fish (Jn 6:8-9). When certain Greeks came to Philip, asking to see Jesus, Philip told Andrew and then the two of them told Jesus (Jn 12:20-22). Finally, Andrew is listed among those who were questioning Jesus privately on the Mt of Olives (Mk 13:3-4). The last NT mention of Andrew is in the list of apostles waiting in the upper room in Jerusalem for the promised outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:12-14).<\/p>\n<p>Various documents associated with Andrew, such as the Acts of Andrew mentioned by the early church historian Eusebius, are of doubtful value. Some traditions indicate that Andrew ministered in Scythia. According to the Muratorian Canon, Andrew received a revelation at night that the apostle John should write the fourth Gospel. Tradition is rather uniform that Andrew died at Patrae in Achaia. A story developed that he was martyred on an X-shaped cross (a “decussate” or “saltire” cross), which has become known as St Andrew’s Cross. Another tradition is that an arm of the dead Andrew was taken into Scotland as a relic by Regulus, and thus Andrew became known as a patron saint of Scotland. On the calendar of saints of the Roman and Greek churches, Andrew’s date is set as November 30. <em>See<\/em> Apocrypha (Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings): Andrew, Acts of; Andrew, Story of; Andrew and Matthias, Acts of; Andrew and Paul, Acts of.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ANDREW, The Apostle One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came in...","summary_en":"ANDREW, The Apostle One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came in...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"9":[{"id":759,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Agriculture*","title_en":"Agriculture*","content_ro":"<h3>AGRICULTURE*<\/h3>\n<p>During Bible times agriculture took the same three main forms found in Palestine today. Emphasis on each of these has depended upon the social and technological status of the people.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Herding<\/p>\n<p>• Field Cropping<\/p>\n<p>• Fruit Raising<\/p>\n<p>• Cultivating<\/p>\n<p>• Harvesting<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Herding\">Herding<\/p>\n<p>Raising livestock is one of the first occupations mentioned in the Scriptures. Abel (Gn 4:2) and Jabal (Gn 4:20) were keepers of sheep or had cattle. This occupation fit the seminomadic life, providing both food and clothing while requiring a minimum of techniques and equipment.<\/p>\n<p>The patriarchs were mainly herdsmen, pasturing their sheep and cattle on common land and generally neglecting to till the soil. Jacob and his sons entered Egypt as shepherds (Gn 47:3). Later this pastoral life is still found in the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh in Transjordan (Nm 32:1) and in certain of the tribes dwelling in the western Palestinian hills (1 Sm 25:2). Herding continued to be a part of Hebrew agriculture even in postnomadic days, partly because the animals utilized less productive lands and partly because of the people’s traditions. Important among these traditions were the sacrifices performed in the temple.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FieldCropping\">Field Cropping<\/p>\n<p>Most authorities agree that the Israelites learned field agriculture from the Canaanites, since contact with these people was contemporaneous with the settling of the Promised Land. The raising of grain is known to have existed before that time. Cain was a tiller of the soil (Gn 4:2), although it is uncertain what he raised. Archaeologists date the existence of grain farming to around 6800 <span>BC<\/span> in the Near East. Isaac sowed in Gerar (Gn 26:12), and Joseph dreamed of sheaves of grain (Gn 37:6-7). Joseph probably learned more about farming grain from the Egyptians, who raised it on the fertile soils of the Nile floodplain.<\/p>\n<p>Yet it was from contact with the Canaanites that Israelites began to raise grain. The productivity of Canaan was reported by Joshua and Caleb at Kadesh-barnea (Nm 13:26), and the Canaanites, who were later conquered, were no doubt made to initiate their conquerors into agricultural practices. Probably such a relationship contributed to the continual Israelite lapses into idolatry (Jgs 9:27). How rapidly they made the transition from the purely nomadic life is not clear. Some tribes never did shed the nomadic way, but cultivation of the soil seems to have been common by the time of the kings (2 Sm 14:30).<\/p>\n<p>Of the cereals raised, wheat was one of the most important. Solomon sent great amounts of it, along with barley and oil, to Hiram (2 Chr 2:10), and it continued to be a chief item of export (Ez 27:17). Barley was second in importance. In early times it was the chief ingredient of bread (Jgs 7:13); later it became an important food for the poorer classes (Jn 6:9, 13). It was also fed to cattle.<\/p>\n<p>Other field crops were beans and lentils (2 Sm 17:28), which were ground into meal and sometimes used for bread (Ez 4:9). Leeks, garlic, and onions were raised for seasoning, and cumin, coriander, dill, mint, rue, and mustard for spices. Flax was important (Jos 2:6). Some cotton was grown (Is 19:9). The fiber supply was supplemented with wool. By Roman times cotton had become much more important than flax.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FruitRaising\">Fruit Raising<\/p>\n<p>When the Israelites became well settled, orchards and vineyards were planted and came to be symbols of prosperity. Vineyards supplied wine to drink. Olive orchards provided oil for cooking, cosmetics, and medicine. Figs and pomegranates were also grown. For all of these crops more skill and equipment became necessary.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cultivating\">Cultivating<\/p>\n<p>Throughout biblical times, much of the labor for agriculture came from the farmer himself. To plant for the first time, it was necessary to clear the land of forest (Jos 17:18), stones (Is 5:2), weeds, and thorns. Sometimes the thin soil on hillsides was terraced, and sometimes irrigation was employed. Such tasks limited the size of farms so that only the wealthy, such as Job and Boaz, had large holdings.<\/p>\n<p>To till the land, farmers used oxen or cows to pull very primitive plows (Jgs 14:18; Am 6:12). Occasionally an ass was used (Dt 22:10). Clods were broken with a hoe or the driver’s goad. The surface was evened by drawing a simple harrow, perhaps only a thornbush, or a stoneboat over it. Seed was sown by hand, sometimes carefully in the furrow, and covered lightly with the harrow or stoneboat. Weeds were controlled by the plow, harrow, or hoe.<\/p>\n\n<p>Implements did not change much during Bible times. The plow consisted of an upright J-shaped piece of hardwood so fixed to be drawn by oxen at one end and held by the driver at the other. Such a primitive device could break up only four to five inches (10 to 13 centimeters) of soil. After the exodus, iron became available for the tip of the plow (1 Sm 13:20), but this served mainly to cut down wear on the point.<\/p>\n<p>The use of fertilizer was very limited on Palestinian farms. Of course, ceremonial law requiring that the soil lie fallow every seventh year helped to replenish water and nutrients, or at least delay their depletion. Manuring of fields was not common because dung was used for fuel. However, there is some mention of this practice in Scripture (Lk 13:8, where dung is placed around trees). There is mention in the Mishnah of the use of wood ashes, leaves, blood of slaughtered animals, and oil scum for fertilizer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Harvesting\">Harvesting<\/p>\n<p>Seeding was done at the beginning of the rainy season and harvesting was begun at the end. Harvesting lasted at least seven weeks. Some crops were pulled up by the roots (pulse), others were dug with a hoe (some grain), but most were cut with a sickle. Iron sickles have been found in archaeological excavations, some with cutting edges set with flakes of flint. The cut grain was tied in sheaves (Ps 126:6) and cast into heaps to be transported to the threshing floor. Barley was harvested first and wheat last.<\/p>\n<p>Small quantities of grain, dill, cumin, and other small crops were beaten out with a flail (Jgs 6:11; Ru 2:17), but most grain was threshed on a floor placed on high ground so that the wind would carry off the chaff. The usual method was to scatter the loosened bundles of straw on the floor and to drive oxen over them to dislodge the grains. Sometimes heavy implements were drawn over the straw (Is 28:27; 41:15). These were weighted by stones and ridden by the driver. The resulting bits of straw, or chaff, were separated from the grain by a tedious winnowing process that involved throwing the material in the air with a fork or shovel (Is 30:24; Jer 15:7). The lighter straw would be blown to the edge of the floor, and the grain would collect at the feet of the worker. The chaff was burned or used as fodder. Grain was sifted (Am 9:9), shoveled into a heap, and later stored in covered pits in the field (Jer 41:8). Sometimes storehouses or granaries were used (Dt 28:8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Plants; Harvest; Palestine; Vines, Vineyard; Food and Food Preparation.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>AGRICULTURE*<\/h3>\n<p>During Bible times agriculture took the same three main forms found in Palestine today. Emphasis on each of these has depended upon the social and technological status of the people.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Herding<\/p>\n<p>• Field Cropping<\/p>\n<p>• Fruit Raising<\/p>\n<p>• Cultivating<\/p>\n<p>• Harvesting<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Herding\">Herding<\/p>\n<p>Raising livestock is one of the first occupations mentioned in the Scriptures. Abel (Gn 4:2) and Jabal (Gn 4:20) were keepers of sheep or had cattle. This occupation fit the seminomadic life, providing both food and clothing while requiring a minimum of techniques and equipment.<\/p>\n<p>The patriarchs were mainly herdsmen, pasturing their sheep and cattle on common land and generally neglecting to till the soil. Jacob and his sons entered Egypt as shepherds (Gn 47:3). Later this pastoral life is still found in the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh in Transjordan (Nm 32:1) and in certain of the tribes dwelling in the western Palestinian hills (1 Sm 25:2). Herding continued to be a part of Hebrew agriculture even in postnomadic days, partly because the animals utilized less productive lands and partly because of the people’s traditions. Important among these traditions were the sacrifices performed in the temple.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FieldCropping\">Field Cropping<\/p>\n<p>Most authorities agree that the Israelites learned field agriculture from the Canaanites, since contact with these people was contemporaneous with the settling of the Promised Land. The raising of grain is known to have existed before that time. Cain was a tiller of the soil (Gn 4:2), although it is uncertain what he raised. Archaeologists date the existence of grain farming to around 6800 <span>BC<\/span> in the Near East. Isaac sowed in Gerar (Gn 26:12), and Joseph dreamed of sheaves of grain (Gn 37:6-7). Joseph probably learned more about farming grain from the Egyptians, who raised it on the fertile soils of the Nile floodplain.<\/p>\n<p>Yet it was from contact with the Canaanites that Israelites began to raise grain. The productivity of Canaan was reported by Joshua and Caleb at Kadesh-barnea (Nm 13:26), and the Canaanites, who were later conquered, were no doubt made to initiate their conquerors into agricultural practices. Probably such a relationship contributed to the continual Israelite lapses into idolatry (Jgs 9:27). How rapidly they made the transition from the purely nomadic life is not clear. Some tribes never did shed the nomadic way, but cultivation of the soil seems to have been common by the time of the kings (2 Sm 14:30).<\/p>\n<p>Of the cereals raised, wheat was one of the most important. Solomon sent great amounts of it, along with barley and oil, to Hiram (2 Chr 2:10), and it continued to be a chief item of export (Ez 27:17). Barley was second in importance. In early times it was the chief ingredient of bread (Jgs 7:13); later it became an important food for the poorer classes (Jn 6:9, 13). It was also fed to cattle.<\/p>\n<p>Other field crops were beans and lentils (2 Sm 17:28), which were ground into meal and sometimes used for bread (Ez 4:9). Leeks, garlic, and onions were raised for seasoning, and cumin, coriander, dill, mint, rue, and mustard for spices. Flax was important (Jos 2:6). Some cotton was grown (Is 19:9). The fiber supply was supplemented with wool. By Roman times cotton had become much more important than flax.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FruitRaising\">Fruit Raising<\/p>\n<p>When the Israelites became well settled, orchards and vineyards were planted and came to be symbols of prosperity. Vineyards supplied wine to drink. Olive orchards provided oil for cooking, cosmetics, and medicine. Figs and pomegranates were also grown. For all of these crops more skill and equipment became necessary.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cultivating\">Cultivating<\/p>\n<p>Throughout biblical times, much of the labor for agriculture came from the farmer himself. To plant for the first time, it was necessary to clear the land of forest (Jos 17:18), stones (Is 5:2), weeds, and thorns. Sometimes the thin soil on hillsides was terraced, and sometimes irrigation was employed. Such tasks limited the size of farms so that only the wealthy, such as Job and Boaz, had large holdings.<\/p>\n<p>To till the land, farmers used oxen or cows to pull very primitive plows (Jgs 14:18; Am 6:12). Occasionally an ass was used (Dt 22:10). Clods were broken with a hoe or the driver’s goad. The surface was evened by drawing a simple harrow, perhaps only a thornbush, or a stoneboat over it. Seed was sown by hand, sometimes carefully in the furrow, and covered lightly with the harrow or stoneboat. Weeds were controlled by the plow, harrow, or hoe.<\/p>\n\n<p>Implements did not change much during Bible times. The plow consisted of an upright J-shaped piece of hardwood so fixed to be drawn by oxen at one end and held by the driver at the other. Such a primitive device could break up only four to five inches (10 to 13 centimeters) of soil. After the exodus, iron became available for the tip of the plow (1 Sm 13:20), but this served mainly to cut down wear on the point.<\/p>\n<p>The use of fertilizer was very limited on Palestinian farms. Of course, ceremonial law requiring that the soil lie fallow every seventh year helped to replenish water and nutrients, or at least delay their depletion. Manuring of fields was not common because dung was used for fuel. However, there is some mention of this practice in Scripture (Lk 13:8, where dung is placed around trees). There is mention in the Mishnah of the use of wood ashes, leaves, blood of slaughtered animals, and oil scum for fertilizer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Harvesting\">Harvesting<\/p>\n<p>Seeding was done at the beginning of the rainy season and harvesting was begun at the end. Harvesting lasted at least seven weeks. Some crops were pulled up by the roots (pulse), others were dug with a hoe (some grain), but most were cut with a sickle. Iron sickles have been found in archaeological excavations, some with cutting edges set with flakes of flint. The cut grain was tied in sheaves (Ps 126:6) and cast into heaps to be transported to the threshing floor. Barley was harvested first and wheat last.<\/p>\n<p>Small quantities of grain, dill, cumin, and other small crops were beaten out with a flail (Jgs 6:11; Ru 2:17), but most grain was threshed on a floor placed on high ground so that the wind would carry off the chaff. The usual method was to scatter the loosened bundles of straw on the floor and to drive oxen over them to dislodge the grains. Sometimes heavy implements were drawn over the straw (Is 28:27; 41:15). These were weighted by stones and ridden by the driver. The resulting bits of straw, or chaff, were separated from the grain by a tedious winnowing process that involved throwing the material in the air with a fork or shovel (Is 30:24; Jer 15:7). The lighter straw would be blown to the edge of the floor, and the grain would collect at the feet of the worker. The chaff was burned or used as fodder. Grain was sifted (Am 9:9), shoveled into a heap, and later stored in covered pits in the field (Jer 41:8). Sometimes storehouses or granaries were used (Dt 28:8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Plants; Harvest; Palestine; Vines, Vineyard; Food and Food Preparation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"AGRICULTURE* During Bible times agriculture took the same three main forms found in Palestine today. Emphasis on each of these has depended upon the social and technological status of the people. Preview • Herding • Field Cropping • Fruit Raising • Cultivating • Harvesting Herding Raising livestock is one of the first occupations mentioned in the Scriptures. Abel (Gn 4:2) and Jabal (Gn 4:20) were keepers of sheep or had cattle. This occupation fit the seminomadic life, providing both food and...","summary_en":"AGRICULTURE* During Bible times agriculture took the same three main forms found in Palestine today. Emphasis on each of these has depended upon the social and technological status of the people. Preview • Herding • Field Cropping • Fruit Raising • Cultivating • Harvesting Herding Raising livestock is one of the first occupations mentioned in the Scriptures. Abel (Gn 4:2) and Jabal (Gn 4:20) were keepers of sheep or had cattle. This occupation fit the seminomadic life, providing both food and...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":5621,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Bread","title_en":"Bread","content_ro":"<h3>BREAD<\/h3>\n<p>Food made from the dough of flour or meal from grain.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"KindsofSeedUsedinMakingBread\">Kinds of Seed Used in Making Bread<\/p>\n<p>The Bible tells us that wheat, barley, rye, beans, lentils, millet, and manna were used in making bread.<\/p>\n<h5>Wheat<\/h5>\n<p>Wheat is mentioned frequently in Scripture (about 48 uses of four Hebrew words in the OT; 14 uses of one Greek word in the NT). The hard winter grain <em>(Triticum aestivuum)<\/em> remains the most popular with farmers of Palestine, who still sow in the fall and reap in the following summer.<\/p>\n<h5>Barley<\/h5>\n<p>Barley matures faster and produces more prolifically than wheat. The hail plague in Egypt destroyed the barley crop because it had ripened; at the same time wheat and rye had not matured (Ex 9:31-32). Barley is mentioned 32 times in the OT. Barley produced a crop even in time of famine (Ru 1:22; 2:17, 23; 3:2, 15, 17) and sold cheaper than wheat (2 Kgs 7:1, 16). Poorer people depended on barley. The boy who contributed his lunch to Jesus to feed 5,000 had barley bread (Jn 6:9, 13). Palestinians fed barley to cattle (1 Kgs 4:28). Barley on the stalk carries a larger husk with a long, wiry hair (thus the name in Hebrew means “long hair”), making chaff separation more difficult. The greater likelihood of extraneous matter in the flour, combined with the less-liked flavor, made barley cheaper.<\/p>\n<h5>Rye<\/h5>\n<p>“Rye” translates a Hebrew word appearing in various versions as “vetch,” “fitches,” or “spelt” (Ex 9:32; Is 28:25; Ez 4:9). A hardy grass, it produces a crop even on poor soil. Rye bread gained popularity in northern Europe and to some degree in Egypt (Ex 9:32). Isaiah 28:24-28 summarizes the farmers’ work in growing and threshing various seed crops. Jews occasionally made bread from rye (Ez 4:9), but normally used it for cattle feed.<\/p>\n<h5>Other Seeds<\/h5>\n<p>Beans, lentils, and millet were ground and mixed to make a bread, along with wheat, barley, and spelt (Ez 4:9). The prophet Ezekiel ate this concoction as a sign of the “defiled bread” the Jews would eat in captivity among the Gentiles.<\/p>\n<h5>Manna<\/h5>\n<p>Numbers 11:8 tells us that the people ground the manna in mills or beat it in a mortar and baked it in pans and made loaves of bread. However, in its prime state God called it bread (see Ex 16:4-32). It appeared as coriander seed (Ex 16:31; Nm 11:7); therefore, the dull white grains were smaller than wheat. The Hebrews complained they had not bread, and their souls hated “this light bread” (Nm 21:5, <span>kjv<\/span>). The psalmist called it “the bread of the angels” (Ps 78:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EquipmentUsedinMakingBread\">Equipment Used in Making Bread<\/p>\n<p>Bas-reliefs in Egyptian mastaba tombs illustrate most of the equipment used in ancient Near Eastern bakeries.<\/p>\n<h5>Sieve<\/h5>\n<p>A wicker strainerlike device helped separate small impurities from the grain.<\/p>\n<h5>Grindstones<\/h5>\n<p>A pair of stones were shaped so that a top stone turned against the bottom stone, crushing grain into flour.<\/p>\n<h5>Jars<\/h5>\n<p>Clay jars contained olive oil, water, and liquid leaven to be mixed with the flour to make dough (Lv 2:4; 1 Kgs 17:12-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Bowls<\/h5>\n<p>Kneading bowls (Ex 8:3; 12:34; Dt 28:5, 17), boards or tables made of wood, provided space for a thorough mixing of ingredients.<\/p>\n<h5>Pans<\/h5>\n<p>The poor used heated flat stones or the inside walls of their ovens as baking pans. Most people used iron griddles, plates, or pans (Lv 2:5; 6:21; 7:9; Nm 11:8; 1 Chr 9:31; 23:29; 2 Chr 35:13; Ez 4:3). These were often flat, with handles up to five feet (1.5 meters) long. The dough placed on the griddle was ready for the heat.<\/p>\n<h5>Ovens<\/h5>\n<p>Sometimes ovens had a chamber separated from the fire, but usually not. A fire of wood, dried grass (Mt 6:30), or dung (Ez 4:12, 15) heated the oven (Lv 2:4; 7:9; 11:35; 26:26; Hos 7:4-7). While the coals and oven walls retained their heat, the plate carrying bread was inserted. Flat, hard unleavened cakes, or small leavened cakes (Mt 14:17; Mk 6:38; Lk 9:13) were done in a few minutes. Large loaves about one foot in diameter would swell to more than three inches (7.6 centimeters) thick, would weigh more than two pounds (.9 kilogram), and required about 45 minutes for baking (1 Sm 17:17; 2 Sm 16:1).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Food and Food Preparation; Meals, Significance of; Bread of the Presence; Leaven; Unleavened Bread.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BREAD<\/h3>\n<p>Food made from the dough of flour or meal from grain.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"KindsofSeedUsedinMakingBread\">Kinds of Seed Used in Making Bread<\/p>\n<p>The Bible tells us that wheat, barley, rye, beans, lentils, millet, and manna were used in making bread.<\/p>\n<h5>Wheat<\/h5>\n<p>Wheat is mentioned frequently in Scripture (about 48 uses of four Hebrew words in the OT; 14 uses of one Greek word in the NT). The hard winter grain <em>(Triticum aestivuum)<\/em> remains the most popular with farmers of Palestine, who still sow in the fall and reap in the following summer.<\/p>\n<h5>Barley<\/h5>\n<p>Barley matures faster and produces more prolifically than wheat. The hail plague in Egypt destroyed the barley crop because it had ripened; at the same time wheat and rye had not matured (Ex 9:31-32). Barley is mentioned 32 times in the OT. Barley produced a crop even in time of famine (Ru 1:22; 2:17, 23; 3:2, 15, 17) and sold cheaper than wheat (2 Kgs 7:1, 16). Poorer people depended on barley. The boy who contributed his lunch to Jesus to feed 5,000 had barley bread (Jn 6:9, 13). Palestinians fed barley to cattle (1 Kgs 4:28). Barley on the stalk carries a larger husk with a long, wiry hair (thus the name in Hebrew means “long hair”), making chaff separation more difficult. The greater likelihood of extraneous matter in the flour, combined with the less-liked flavor, made barley cheaper.<\/p>\n<h5>Rye<\/h5>\n<p>“Rye” translates a Hebrew word appearing in various versions as “vetch,” “fitches,” or “spelt” (Ex 9:32; Is 28:25; Ez 4:9). A hardy grass, it produces a crop even on poor soil. Rye bread gained popularity in northern Europe and to some degree in Egypt (Ex 9:32). Isaiah 28:24-28 summarizes the farmers’ work in growing and threshing various seed crops. Jews occasionally made bread from rye (Ez 4:9), but normally used it for cattle feed.<\/p>\n<h5>Other Seeds<\/h5>\n<p>Beans, lentils, and millet were ground and mixed to make a bread, along with wheat, barley, and spelt (Ez 4:9). The prophet Ezekiel ate this concoction as a sign of the “defiled bread” the Jews would eat in captivity among the Gentiles.<\/p>\n<h5>Manna<\/h5>\n<p>Numbers 11:8 tells us that the people ground the manna in mills or beat it in a mortar and baked it in pans and made loaves of bread. However, in its prime state God called it bread (see Ex 16:4-32). It appeared as coriander seed (Ex 16:31; Nm 11:7); therefore, the dull white grains were smaller than wheat. The Hebrews complained they had not bread, and their souls hated “this light bread” (Nm 21:5, <span>kjv<\/span>). The psalmist called it “the bread of the angels” (Ps 78:25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EquipmentUsedinMakingBread\">Equipment Used in Making Bread<\/p>\n<p>Bas-reliefs in Egyptian mastaba tombs illustrate most of the equipment used in ancient Near Eastern bakeries.<\/p>\n<h5>Sieve<\/h5>\n<p>A wicker strainerlike device helped separate small impurities from the grain.<\/p>\n<h5>Grindstones<\/h5>\n<p>A pair of stones were shaped so that a top stone turned against the bottom stone, crushing grain into flour.<\/p>\n<h5>Jars<\/h5>\n<p>Clay jars contained olive oil, water, and liquid leaven to be mixed with the flour to make dough (Lv 2:4; 1 Kgs 17:12-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Bowls<\/h5>\n<p>Kneading bowls (Ex 8:3; 12:34; Dt 28:5, 17), boards or tables made of wood, provided space for a thorough mixing of ingredients.<\/p>\n<h5>Pans<\/h5>\n<p>The poor used heated flat stones or the inside walls of their ovens as baking pans. Most people used iron griddles, plates, or pans (Lv 2:5; 6:21; 7:9; Nm 11:8; 1 Chr 9:31; 23:29; 2 Chr 35:13; Ez 4:3). These were often flat, with handles up to five feet (1.5 meters) long. The dough placed on the griddle was ready for the heat.<\/p>\n<h5>Ovens<\/h5>\n<p>Sometimes ovens had a chamber separated from the fire, but usually not. A fire of wood, dried grass (Mt 6:30), or dung (Ez 4:12, 15) heated the oven (Lv 2:4; 7:9; 11:35; 26:26; Hos 7:4-7). While the coals and oven walls retained their heat, the plate carrying bread was inserted. Flat, hard unleavened cakes, or small leavened cakes (Mt 14:17; Mk 6:38; Lk 9:13) were done in a few minutes. Large loaves about one foot in diameter would swell to more than three inches (7.6 centimeters) thick, would weigh more than two pounds (.9 kilogram), and required about 45 minutes for baking (1 Sm 17:17; 2 Sm 16:1).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Food and Food Preparation; Meals, Significance of; Bread of the Presence; Leaven; Unleavened Bread.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BREAD Food made from the dough of flour or meal from grain. Kinds of Seed Used in Making Bread The Bible tells us that wheat, barley, rye, beans, lentils, millet, and manna were used in making bread. Wheat Wheat is mentioned frequently in Scripture (about 48 uses of four Hebrew words in the OT; 14 uses of one Greek word in the NT). The hard winter grain (Triticum aestivuum) remains the most popular with farmers of Palestine, who still sow in the fall and reap in the following summer. Barley B...","summary_en":"BREAD Food made from the dough of flour or meal from grain. Kinds of Seed Used in Making Bread The Bible tells us that wheat, barley, rye, beans, lentils, millet, and manna were used in making bread. Wheat Wheat is mentioned frequently in Scripture (about 48 uses of four Hebrew words in the OT; 14 uses of one Greek word in the NT). The hard winter grain (Triticum aestivuum) remains the most popular with farmers of Palestine, who still sow in the fall and reap in the following summer. Barley B...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":12491,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Food and Food Preparation","title_en":"Food and Food Preparation","content_ro":"<h3>FOOD AND FOOD PREPARATION<\/h3>\n<p>Substances required by the body to sustain life, and the methods of making them edible. Food consumed in Bible times included bread, milk products, fruit, meat, and fish. Food was also offered sacrificially or given as gifts. The availability of food was a perpetual concern because of the recurrent scarcity: droughts were frequent (2 Kgs 4:38; Jer 14:1, 4-6; Hg 1:11), hailstorms wrought devastation among crops (Hg 2:17), farming was frequently interrupted by warfare with neighboring nations (2 Kgs 6:25), and intermittent plagues of locusts ravaged large areas.<\/p>\n<p>Food was more plentiful in Palestine (described as a “land flowing with milk and honey”) than in many other parts of the Near East. Shallow cultivation of the soil, however, made crops highly reliant on regular rainfall. Egyptian crops were far less susceptible to weather variations, because the Nile provided a dependable source of water.<\/p>\n<p>Food shortages were considered warnings or punishment from God (Lam 4:9, 11; Am 4:6-9) to teach the Hebrews that life is more than food and that faith must continue despite scarcity, famine, or even death (Dt 8:3; Hb 3:17-18).<\/p>\n<p>The staples of nomadic Hebrews were milk, curds, and cheese. As the people became more stationary, they grew grains and vegetables and planted orchards and vineyards. Grain would sometimes be grown for a season, and then after the harvest, the tribes would move their flocks to other pastures and find other arable land. Religious sacrifices and festivals were times not only of solemnity but also of rejoicing and great feasting. Victories were also celebrated with banquets and feasting on the food obtained from the camp of the vanquished enemy.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Dairy Products<\/p>\n<p>• Grain Crops<\/p>\n<p>• Animal Products<\/p>\n<p>• Insects and Their Food Products<\/p>\n<p>• Vegetables and Seasoning<\/p>\n<p>• Fruits, Nuts, and Wine<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DairyProducts\">Dairy Products<\/p>\n<p>Milk and its by-products formed a vital part of the Hebrew diet (see Jgs 4:19). Goat’s milk was most frequently used, although milk from camels, cows, and sheep was also available (Gn 32:15; Dt 32:14; Prv 27:27).<\/p>\n<p>Since fresh milk could not be preserved in Palestine’s hot climate, it was processed into buttermilk, curds, and cheese. Milk was poured into goatskins, where it soured and thickened because of the nonsterile condition of the previously used skins and the movement as it was transported. That movement of the pouch (often made from a cow’s stomach, containing the enzyme rennin used in cheese making) produced curds. Curds are first mentioned in the Bible as part of the meal that Abraham provided for his extraordinary guests (Gn 18:8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word for curds <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">chena<\/span><em>)<\/em> is also translated “butter” (Jb 10:10). This butter would be similar in consistency to yogurt from which the water has been squeezed out. When pressed and rolled into small balls, it kept indefinitely, despite the climate. Thus, compressed curds were particularly valuable for journeys in arid regions where food was scarce.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GrainCrops\">Grain Crops<\/p>\n<p>The most frequently mentioned food in the Bible is bread. The term refers in a general sense to all foods but more particularly to food prepared from grain. In biblical times bread was prepared from several grains. Wheat, barley, and spelt were grown in Egypt (Ex 9:31-32).<\/p>\n<p>An Egyptian physician named Sinuhe, living in the mid-20th century <span>BC<\/span>, recorded that bread was baked daily in Palestine and Syria, and it is probable that it was served with every meal. This bread was probably a wafer or flat cake made from barley or emmer (an inferior form of wheat), since these were the two grain crops that Sinuhe mentioned seeing. Wheat was the most expensive grain. Fine wheat flour was a luxury only the rich could afford (Gn 18:6; Ez 16:13, 19). In later periods wheat became a valuable export crop that was shipped from Tyre to other ports in the Mediterranean.<\/p>\n<p>Because barley could grow in less productive soil and was more tolerant of drought conditions, it became a popular grain crop in the ancient Near East. Barley could also be harvested several weeks earlier than wheat. Barley bread (Jgs 7:13; 2 Kgs 4:42) and barley cakes (Ez 4:12) were eaten by the average laborer. Jesus miraculously multiplied a young boy’s five barley loaves and two fishes and fed five thousand (Jn 6:9-13).<\/p>\n<p>Millet, a cereal with a small grain head growing on a stalk less than two feet (.6 meter) high, and spelt, a type of wheat, were also used in times of need as a border around the edges of fields.<\/p>\n<p>The most primitive way of processing grain was to rub the ears between the hands to separate the kernels, as Jesus and his disciples did (Lk 6:1). To perform this act on the Sabbath (the day of rest) was considered the equivalent of reaping and was therefore forbidden.<\/p>\n<p>Parching (roasting the grain lightly in a pan) was another simple method of preparation (Jos 5:11; 1 Sm 17:17). It formed a quick and easy meal for laborers or kings (Ru 2:14; 1 Sm 25:18; 2 Sm 17:28). Parched corn was ideal for taking on journeys.<\/p>\n<p>Bread making was a strenuous task. Mortars, pestles, and simple mills with upper and lower stones were used for grinding flour in ancient Egypt around 2900 <span>BC<\/span>. These primitive mills were normally placed on the ground, and one was compelled to kneel in order to do the backbreaking work. The resulting meal was coarse and filled with small pieces of husk.<\/p>\n<p>When the flour had been prepared, water was added and the mixture was kneaded in a special trough. The dough could then be made immediately into cakes, pancakes, or unleavened bread (Gn 19:3). These flat cakes or wafers were often baked on previously heated stones, on the inner walls of small conical ovens, or in larger communal ovens. Leaven was added to make a lighter dough. The leaven was normally a piece of dough left over from an earlier mixing and allowed to ferment before being used. The flour meal was also mixed with a porridge made of lentil beans in order to stretch the food supply.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AnimalProducts\">Animal Products<\/p>\n<p>The introduction of meat as part of the diet seems to have coincided with the time when Noah and his family left the ark (Gn 9:3). After this time, however, the animals normally eaten for food were so valuable that only the wealthy could afford to slaughter them. So in biblical times the peasant had a simple, somewhat monotonous diet, while the rich feasted on meat, delicacies, and imported commodities. As a result, meat was a luxury item that the poor would rarely enjoy except on such occasions as the Passover celebration or sacrifices in which the worshiper ate part of the offering (Ex 12:8). Although it was clearly uneconomic to slaughter an animal that produced such staples as milk, curds, and cheese, the rules of hospitality in the Near East dictated that an animal should be killed to entertain an honored guest (2 Sm 12:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>Domestic sheep, goats, and oxen provided the main source of meat, although venison was popular with the upper classes. When the blind Isaac was deceived by his son Jacob, the father was offered the luxury of both kid’s meat and wild game (Gn 27:3, 9, 19). The ox kept in a stall or the fatted calf were reserved for occasions of great festivity (Mt 22:4).<\/p>\n<p>The use of meat for sacrifice was given definitive form in the provisions of Leviticus and Deuteronomy. The Law forbade anyone to slaughter an animal and its offspring on the same day (Lv 22:28). Another prohibition, perhaps directed at pagan Canaanite sacrificial rituals, would not allow a kid to be stewed or poached in its mother’s milk (Dt 14:21). Mosaic law was emphatic in prohibiting the consumption of blood in any form. Animal blood was considered the source of the animal’s life and was offered by priests as a sacrifice to God to atone for human sin (Lv 17:11). In the Mosaic law, pigs, camels, badgers, and rabbits were considered unclean and were therefore forbidden for food, principally on hygienic grounds (11:4-8).<\/p>\n<p>In the ancient world, meat was usually boiled or stewed. Roasting an ox or a kid would usually occur only as part of a special feast or sacrificial ritual. Animals might also be roasted for members of the royal palace or for a king’s special guests.<\/p>\n<p>Despite the fact that hunting was enjoyed by all who were able to participate, wild game provided only a minor part of the diet. Among the game found in Palestine and mentioned in the Bible are gazelle, roebuck, wild goat, and deer (Dt 14:5; 1 Kgs 4:23). It is probable that pheasants were available, and there were certainly turtledoves, pigeons, quails, and partridges, although the precise quantities of food that these birds provided is not certain (Gn 15:9; Ex 16:13). Goose was the most popular dish in Egypt, and marsh ducks were also highly esteemed as game. After the Persian period, chickens were eaten (2 Esd 1:30), and eggs and omelettes were popular in Rome in early Christian times. The eggs mentioned in Deuteronomy are probably wild birds’ eggs (Dt 22:6-7; cf. Is 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>Thirty varieties of fish were available in the Jordan, and an extensive fishing industry existed on the shores of the Sea of Galilee at the time of Christ. Supplies of fish were readily available from the Mediterranean coast during the Roman period, but at an earlier time the fish supply depended to a large extent upon whichever nation had control of the coastline. In the postexilic period the people of Tyre supplied the city of Jerusalem with fish, which were sold near the Fish Gate (Neh 3:3). In the regulations concerning the types of fish suitable for food, only those that had fins and scales were acceptable (Lv 11:9-12).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times many of the distinctions concerning food were eliminated. In the Gospel of Mark, Jesus, challenging the Pharisees’ hypocrisy, upset the Jewish food laws by saying that evil thoughts, not certain foods, make a person unclean (Mk 7:19). As Christianity spread into gentile areas, there was, however, a continuing concern about eating meat that had been offered to idols. The question came to a head in Corinth. The apostle Paul maintained that though the meat was acceptable, one should take care not to cause spiritual damage to another Christian with a more sensitive conscience.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InsectsandTheirFoodProducts\">Insects and Their Food Products<\/p>\n<p>Wild honey was found in Palestine, but there is no evidence of bee-keeping. Egyptians, however, did practice beekeeping at that time.<\/p>\n<p>The honeycomb is mentioned specifically in 1 Samuel 14:27 and Song of Songs 5:1; liquid honey is referred to in 1 Kings 14:3. Honey was to be found in crevices of rocks and on trees (Dt 32:13). It was the primary sweetener in cooking. Although it could not be used in a sacrifice to the Lord (Lv 2:11), honey was prized as a delicacy. In the 15th century <span>BC<\/span>, when Thutmose III was campaigning in Syria and Palestine, he brought back vast quantities of honey as tribute from his newly conquered lands.<\/p>\n<p>Locusts were probably first eaten in desperation after they had devastated crops. They are one of the few insects mentioned as a permissible source of food (Lv 11:22). Locusts were fried in flour or honey, or were preserved by being dried. Locusts and wild honey formed John the Baptist’s basic diet in the wilderness (Mt 3:4; Mk 1:6). Although locusts contain little protein, they are rich in fat and have some mineral content.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"VegetablesandSeasoning\">Vegetables and Seasoning<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew people wandering in the Sinai wilderness bemoaned the loss of the flavorful vegetables they had become accustomed to during their Egyptian captivity. In particular, they expressed a longing for cucumbers, melons (possibly watermelons), leeks, onions, and garlic (Nm 11:5). Many of these vegetables were later grown in Palestine (particularly in the Gaza). When cucumbers were first cultivated, they were regarded as luxury items and had to be protected by guards who lived in shacks overlooking the gardens (Is 1:8). Beans, lentils, and parched grain were among the items brought to David and his soldiers at Mahanaim (2 Sm 17:28). Lentils were known in Egypt from at least the 13th century <span>BC<\/span> and were used extensively both then and in later times by the Israelites. Lentil soup is mentioned in Genesis 25:34.<\/p>\n<p>In times of hunger the husks of the carob tree, normally fed to cattle, could be used for food. These would have been most acceptable to the prodigal son (Lk 15:16). There were many kinds of green herbs that could provide a meal for the poor in time of need (Prv 15:17). In cases of extreme hunger, some kinds of mallow and juniper roots could also be used as food. In Elisha’s time a group of prophets at Gilgal prepared a stew of wild vegetables, to which they mistakenly added poisonous wild gourds. Elisha rectified the situation by adding meal to the pot (2 Kgs 4:38-41). While there is no actual record of the kinds of bitter herbs used as part of the Passover offering (Ex 12:8; Nm 9:11), mint and cummin were most probably included. Dill, cummin, rue, and mint were common garden herbs (Mt 23:23; Lk 11:42).<\/p>\n<p>Seasonings were welcome additives to the rather bland character of typical Israelite fare. Salt came mainly from the Dead Sea area and was essential as a seasoning and preserving agent. Salt was so important in the diet that it became part of the vocabulary of moral obligation. The sharing of salt with a person at a meal sealed a covenant or pact (Nm 18:19). In the Levitical sacrificial ritual, salt was part of meat and cereal offerings, since it signified the sealing of God’s covenant with Israel (Lv 2:13; Ez 43:24).<\/p>\n<p>The mustard tree, which was probably grown for its oil content, grew from a minute seed to the height of 15 feet (4.5 meters) (Mt 13:31-32). Anise, coriander, and cinnamon were also available (Ex 16:31; Nm 11:7). Perhaps the most popular and widely used spice, apart from salt, was garlic. Vinegar was also probably used as a flavoring agent and a preservative. From the number of seeds and plants found in Egyptian tombs from the 18th dynasty, it is obvious that the use of seasoning was widespread in antiquity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FruitsNutsandWine\">Fruits, Nuts, and Wine<\/p>\n<p>Olive trees grew abundantly in Palestine and were an excellent source of food and oil. Even in poor soil, one tree could sufficiently supply a family for a whole year. Some green olives were pickled in brine and eaten with bread, but the olive was most important as a source of oil. Olive oil was used in baking bread and cakes and in frying foods. The best quality olive oil was used in the temple sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p>Oil was extracted from olives by a simple process: for the finest quality oil, olives were picked before fully ripe and then crushed by hand with a stone mortar and pestle. Usually, however, pickers beat the olives from trees with long poles and collected them in baskets. The oil was then trodden out, probably in the same vat used for grapes (Mi 6:15), which were harvested approximately four weeks later.<\/p>\n<p>An oil mill was developed subsequently, and the heavy upper grinding stone was turned by two people. As the oil dripped through, it was collected in another stone vat and was allowed to settle and purify. When refined, the oil was stored in skins or jars.<\/p>\n<p>Fig trees grew in all areas of Palestine. They required little attention and provided two or three crops per year. The most abundant of these was the second, which ripened in late summer. The first figs of the season were considered a great delicacy (Is 28:4; Mi 7:1). The prophet Hosea suggested that the Israelites were like the firstfruits of the fig tree (Hos 9:10). Another prophet, Jeremiah, spoke of those who had gone into exile as being like the first figs, while those who were left behind were the bad figs, fit only for destruction (Jer 24:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Figs were usually eaten fresh from the trees, but some were pressed into cakes to use when traveling (1 Sm 25:18; 30:12; 1 Chr 12:40). Figs were also valuable for medicinal purposes, since effective poultices could be made from them (2 Kgs 20:7; Is 38:21). Sycamore trees produced small, figlike fruit eaten primarily by the poor. A short time before harvest, the fruit was slightly incised, making it swell and ripen more quickly. The prophet Amos notched sycamore fruit before he was called by God (Am 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>Fruit from the date palm could also have been pressed into flat cakes for travelers, as figs were. The Bible, however, makes no specific reference to its fruit as food (see Jgs 4:5; Ps 92:12; Jl 1:12; Jn 12:13).<\/p>\n<p>Another popular Near Eastern fruit was the red pomegranate. It was eaten whole, or the seeds were pressed to provide a refreshing drink. The pomegranate is mentioned in temple ritual as one of the fruits brought back from Canaan to Moses by his spies (Ex 28:33) and as an exotic drink (Sg 8:2). The “apple” mentioned in Scripture (Prv 25:11; Sg 2:5) was most likely a type of apricot or quince, not an apple as we know it today. Nuts were used for additional flavor in cooking. Almonds and pistachio nuts were among the gifts sent by Jacob to ransom his sons (Gn 43:11).<\/p>\n<p>Grapes were popular and plentiful from the early Bronze Age. In addition to being eaten fresh from the vine, grapes were dried as raisins (Nm 6:3; 1 Sm 25:18) or pressed, their juice drunk either as new wine or fermented into an alcoholic drink. One of the duties of the cup-bearer in ancient royal courts was to provide grape juice or wine for the king, his family, and guests (Gn 40:9-13).<\/p>\n<p>The juice of grapes also provided vinegar when wine deteriorated. Vinegar was used as a flavoring agent in cooking and as a preservative. When diluted with water, it supplied a refreshing drink for workers in the fields. A type of jelly was made in the Near East by boiling grapes until they assumed the consistency of molasses. This syrup could also be used as a sweetening agent in cooking.<\/p>\n<p>Wine was the universal drink in antiquity. It could be diluted with water or mixed with spices or honey to make a mulled wine (Sg 8:2; Is 5:22). The Hebrew word for “banquet” or “feast” literally means “drinking,” which reveals much of the character of such occasions. A certain amount of merriment was considered proper at a festival or banquet (Gn 43:34; Jgs 9:13; Lk 5:34).<\/p>\n<p>Wine making was similar in many respects to the production of olive oil. Clusters of grapes were cut from the vine with a sickle, collected in baskets, and taken to the winepress, where they were trodden by men and women. The juice ran into a lower vat, where, under the hot sun, fermentation began almost immediately. The wine was left to settle so that any twigs or skins would form a sediment; after that the wine could be strained off. In about six weeks the wine was ready to drink or store in earthenware jars or wineskins.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Animals; Bread; Family Life and Relations; Leaven; Meals, Significance of; Plants; Unleavened Bread.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FOOD AND FOOD PREPARATION<\/h3>\n<p>Substances required by the body to sustain life, and the methods of making them edible. Food consumed in Bible times included bread, milk products, fruit, meat, and fish. Food was also offered sacrificially or given as gifts. The availability of food was a perpetual concern because of the recurrent scarcity: droughts were frequent (2 Kgs 4:38; Jer 14:1, 4-6; Hg 1:11), hailstorms wrought devastation among crops (Hg 2:17), farming was frequently interrupted by warfare with neighboring nations (2 Kgs 6:25), and intermittent plagues of locusts ravaged large areas.<\/p>\n<p>Food was more plentiful in Palestine (described as a “land flowing with milk and honey”) than in many other parts of the Near East. Shallow cultivation of the soil, however, made crops highly reliant on regular rainfall. Egyptian crops were far less susceptible to weather variations, because the Nile provided a dependable source of water.<\/p>\n<p>Food shortages were considered warnings or punishment from God (Lam 4:9, 11; Am 4:6-9) to teach the Hebrews that life is more than food and that faith must continue despite scarcity, famine, or even death (Dt 8:3; Hb 3:17-18).<\/p>\n<p>The staples of nomadic Hebrews were milk, curds, and cheese. As the people became more stationary, they grew grains and vegetables and planted orchards and vineyards. Grain would sometimes be grown for a season, and then after the harvest, the tribes would move their flocks to other pastures and find other arable land. Religious sacrifices and festivals were times not only of solemnity but also of rejoicing and great feasting. Victories were also celebrated with banquets and feasting on the food obtained from the camp of the vanquished enemy.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Dairy Products<\/p>\n<p>• Grain Crops<\/p>\n<p>• Animal Products<\/p>\n<p>• Insects and Their Food Products<\/p>\n<p>• Vegetables and Seasoning<\/p>\n<p>• Fruits, Nuts, and Wine<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DairyProducts\">Dairy Products<\/p>\n<p>Milk and its by-products formed a vital part of the Hebrew diet (see Jgs 4:19). Goat’s milk was most frequently used, although milk from camels, cows, and sheep was also available (Gn 32:15; Dt 32:14; Prv 27:27).<\/p>\n<p>Since fresh milk could not be preserved in Palestine’s hot climate, it was processed into buttermilk, curds, and cheese. Milk was poured into goatskins, where it soured and thickened because of the nonsterile condition of the previously used skins and the movement as it was transported. That movement of the pouch (often made from a cow’s stomach, containing the enzyme rennin used in cheese making) produced curds. Curds are first mentioned in the Bible as part of the meal that Abraham provided for his extraordinary guests (Gn 18:8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word for curds <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">chena<\/span><em>)<\/em> is also translated “butter” (Jb 10:10). This butter would be similar in consistency to yogurt from which the water has been squeezed out. When pressed and rolled into small balls, it kept indefinitely, despite the climate. Thus, compressed curds were particularly valuable for journeys in arid regions where food was scarce.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GrainCrops\">Grain Crops<\/p>\n<p>The most frequently mentioned food in the Bible is bread. The term refers in a general sense to all foods but more particularly to food prepared from grain. In biblical times bread was prepared from several grains. Wheat, barley, and spelt were grown in Egypt (Ex 9:31-32).<\/p>\n<p>An Egyptian physician named Sinuhe, living in the mid-20th century <span>BC<\/span>, recorded that bread was baked daily in Palestine and Syria, and it is probable that it was served with every meal. This bread was probably a wafer or flat cake made from barley or emmer (an inferior form of wheat), since these were the two grain crops that Sinuhe mentioned seeing. Wheat was the most expensive grain. Fine wheat flour was a luxury only the rich could afford (Gn 18:6; Ez 16:13, 19). In later periods wheat became a valuable export crop that was shipped from Tyre to other ports in the Mediterranean.<\/p>\n<p>Because barley could grow in less productive soil and was more tolerant of drought conditions, it became a popular grain crop in the ancient Near East. Barley could also be harvested several weeks earlier than wheat. Barley bread (Jgs 7:13; 2 Kgs 4:42) and barley cakes (Ez 4:12) were eaten by the average laborer. Jesus miraculously multiplied a young boy’s five barley loaves and two fishes and fed five thousand (Jn 6:9-13).<\/p>\n<p>Millet, a cereal with a small grain head growing on a stalk less than two feet (.6 meter) high, and spelt, a type of wheat, were also used in times of need as a border around the edges of fields.<\/p>\n<p>The most primitive way of processing grain was to rub the ears between the hands to separate the kernels, as Jesus and his disciples did (Lk 6:1). To perform this act on the Sabbath (the day of rest) was considered the equivalent of reaping and was therefore forbidden.<\/p>\n<p>Parching (roasting the grain lightly in a pan) was another simple method of preparation (Jos 5:11; 1 Sm 17:17). It formed a quick and easy meal for laborers or kings (Ru 2:14; 1 Sm 25:18; 2 Sm 17:28). Parched corn was ideal for taking on journeys.<\/p>\n<p>Bread making was a strenuous task. Mortars, pestles, and simple mills with upper and lower stones were used for grinding flour in ancient Egypt around 2900 <span>BC<\/span>. These primitive mills were normally placed on the ground, and one was compelled to kneel in order to do the backbreaking work. The resulting meal was coarse and filled with small pieces of husk.<\/p>\n<p>When the flour had been prepared, water was added and the mixture was kneaded in a special trough. The dough could then be made immediately into cakes, pancakes, or unleavened bread (Gn 19:3). These flat cakes or wafers were often baked on previously heated stones, on the inner walls of small conical ovens, or in larger communal ovens. Leaven was added to make a lighter dough. The leaven was normally a piece of dough left over from an earlier mixing and allowed to ferment before being used. The flour meal was also mixed with a porridge made of lentil beans in order to stretch the food supply.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AnimalProducts\">Animal Products<\/p>\n<p>The introduction of meat as part of the diet seems to have coincided with the time when Noah and his family left the ark (Gn 9:3). After this time, however, the animals normally eaten for food were so valuable that only the wealthy could afford to slaughter them. So in biblical times the peasant had a simple, somewhat monotonous diet, while the rich feasted on meat, delicacies, and imported commodities. As a result, meat was a luxury item that the poor would rarely enjoy except on such occasions as the Passover celebration or sacrifices in which the worshiper ate part of the offering (Ex 12:8). Although it was clearly uneconomic to slaughter an animal that produced such staples as milk, curds, and cheese, the rules of hospitality in the Near East dictated that an animal should be killed to entertain an honored guest (2 Sm 12:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>Domestic sheep, goats, and oxen provided the main source of meat, although venison was popular with the upper classes. When the blind Isaac was deceived by his son Jacob, the father was offered the luxury of both kid’s meat and wild game (Gn 27:3, 9, 19). The ox kept in a stall or the fatted calf were reserved for occasions of great festivity (Mt 22:4).<\/p>\n<p>The use of meat for sacrifice was given definitive form in the provisions of Leviticus and Deuteronomy. The Law forbade anyone to slaughter an animal and its offspring on the same day (Lv 22:28). Another prohibition, perhaps directed at pagan Canaanite sacrificial rituals, would not allow a kid to be stewed or poached in its mother’s milk (Dt 14:21). Mosaic law was emphatic in prohibiting the consumption of blood in any form. Animal blood was considered the source of the animal’s life and was offered by priests as a sacrifice to God to atone for human sin (Lv 17:11). In the Mosaic law, pigs, camels, badgers, and rabbits were considered unclean and were therefore forbidden for food, principally on hygienic grounds (11:4-8).<\/p>\n<p>In the ancient world, meat was usually boiled or stewed. Roasting an ox or a kid would usually occur only as part of a special feast or sacrificial ritual. Animals might also be roasted for members of the royal palace or for a king’s special guests.<\/p>\n<p>Despite the fact that hunting was enjoyed by all who were able to participate, wild game provided only a minor part of the diet. Among the game found in Palestine and mentioned in the Bible are gazelle, roebuck, wild goat, and deer (Dt 14:5; 1 Kgs 4:23). It is probable that pheasants were available, and there were certainly turtledoves, pigeons, quails, and partridges, although the precise quantities of food that these birds provided is not certain (Gn 15:9; Ex 16:13). Goose was the most popular dish in Egypt, and marsh ducks were also highly esteemed as game. After the Persian period, chickens were eaten (2 Esd 1:30), and eggs and omelettes were popular in Rome in early Christian times. The eggs mentioned in Deuteronomy are probably wild birds’ eggs (Dt 22:6-7; cf. Is 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>Thirty varieties of fish were available in the Jordan, and an extensive fishing industry existed on the shores of the Sea of Galilee at the time of Christ. Supplies of fish were readily available from the Mediterranean coast during the Roman period, but at an earlier time the fish supply depended to a large extent upon whichever nation had control of the coastline. In the postexilic period the people of Tyre supplied the city of Jerusalem with fish, which were sold near the Fish Gate (Neh 3:3). In the regulations concerning the types of fish suitable for food, only those that had fins and scales were acceptable (Lv 11:9-12).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times many of the distinctions concerning food were eliminated. In the Gospel of Mark, Jesus, challenging the Pharisees’ hypocrisy, upset the Jewish food laws by saying that evil thoughts, not certain foods, make a person unclean (Mk 7:19). As Christianity spread into gentile areas, there was, however, a continuing concern about eating meat that had been offered to idols. The question came to a head in Corinth. The apostle Paul maintained that though the meat was acceptable, one should take care not to cause spiritual damage to another Christian with a more sensitive conscience.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InsectsandTheirFoodProducts\">Insects and Their Food Products<\/p>\n<p>Wild honey was found in Palestine, but there is no evidence of bee-keeping. Egyptians, however, did practice beekeeping at that time.<\/p>\n<p>The honeycomb is mentioned specifically in 1 Samuel 14:27 and Song of Songs 5:1; liquid honey is referred to in 1 Kings 14:3. Honey was to be found in crevices of rocks and on trees (Dt 32:13). It was the primary sweetener in cooking. Although it could not be used in a sacrifice to the Lord (Lv 2:11), honey was prized as a delicacy. In the 15th century <span>BC<\/span>, when Thutmose III was campaigning in Syria and Palestine, he brought back vast quantities of honey as tribute from his newly conquered lands.<\/p>\n<p>Locusts were probably first eaten in desperation after they had devastated crops. They are one of the few insects mentioned as a permissible source of food (Lv 11:22). Locusts were fried in flour or honey, or were preserved by being dried. Locusts and wild honey formed John the Baptist’s basic diet in the wilderness (Mt 3:4; Mk 1:6). Although locusts contain little protein, they are rich in fat and have some mineral content.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"VegetablesandSeasoning\">Vegetables and Seasoning<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew people wandering in the Sinai wilderness bemoaned the loss of the flavorful vegetables they had become accustomed to during their Egyptian captivity. In particular, they expressed a longing for cucumbers, melons (possibly watermelons), leeks, onions, and garlic (Nm 11:5). Many of these vegetables were later grown in Palestine (particularly in the Gaza). When cucumbers were first cultivated, they were regarded as luxury items and had to be protected by guards who lived in shacks overlooking the gardens (Is 1:8). Beans, lentils, and parched grain were among the items brought to David and his soldiers at Mahanaim (2 Sm 17:28). Lentils were known in Egypt from at least the 13th century <span>BC<\/span> and were used extensively both then and in later times by the Israelites. Lentil soup is mentioned in Genesis 25:34.<\/p>\n<p>In times of hunger the husks of the carob tree, normally fed to cattle, could be used for food. These would have been most acceptable to the prodigal son (Lk 15:16). There were many kinds of green herbs that could provide a meal for the poor in time of need (Prv 15:17). In cases of extreme hunger, some kinds of mallow and juniper roots could also be used as food. In Elisha’s time a group of prophets at Gilgal prepared a stew of wild vegetables, to which they mistakenly added poisonous wild gourds. Elisha rectified the situation by adding meal to the pot (2 Kgs 4:38-41). While there is no actual record of the kinds of bitter herbs used as part of the Passover offering (Ex 12:8; Nm 9:11), mint and cummin were most probably included. Dill, cummin, rue, and mint were common garden herbs (Mt 23:23; Lk 11:42).<\/p>\n<p>Seasonings were welcome additives to the rather bland character of typical Israelite fare. Salt came mainly from the Dead Sea area and was essential as a seasoning and preserving agent. Salt was so important in the diet that it became part of the vocabulary of moral obligation. The sharing of salt with a person at a meal sealed a covenant or pact (Nm 18:19). In the Levitical sacrificial ritual, salt was part of meat and cereal offerings, since it signified the sealing of God’s covenant with Israel (Lv 2:13; Ez 43:24).<\/p>\n<p>The mustard tree, which was probably grown for its oil content, grew from a minute seed to the height of 15 feet (4.5 meters) (Mt 13:31-32). Anise, coriander, and cinnamon were also available (Ex 16:31; Nm 11:7). Perhaps the most popular and widely used spice, apart from salt, was garlic. Vinegar was also probably used as a flavoring agent and a preservative. From the number of seeds and plants found in Egyptian tombs from the 18th dynasty, it is obvious that the use of seasoning was widespread in antiquity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FruitsNutsandWine\">Fruits, Nuts, and Wine<\/p>\n<p>Olive trees grew abundantly in Palestine and were an excellent source of food and oil. Even in poor soil, one tree could sufficiently supply a family for a whole year. Some green olives were pickled in brine and eaten with bread, but the olive was most important as a source of oil. Olive oil was used in baking bread and cakes and in frying foods. The best quality olive oil was used in the temple sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p>Oil was extracted from olives by a simple process: for the finest quality oil, olives were picked before fully ripe and then crushed by hand with a stone mortar and pestle. Usually, however, pickers beat the olives from trees with long poles and collected them in baskets. The oil was then trodden out, probably in the same vat used for grapes (Mi 6:15), which were harvested approximately four weeks later.<\/p>\n<p>An oil mill was developed subsequently, and the heavy upper grinding stone was turned by two people. As the oil dripped through, it was collected in another stone vat and was allowed to settle and purify. When refined, the oil was stored in skins or jars.<\/p>\n<p>Fig trees grew in all areas of Palestine. They required little attention and provided two or three crops per year. The most abundant of these was the second, which ripened in late summer. The first figs of the season were considered a great delicacy (Is 28:4; Mi 7:1). The prophet Hosea suggested that the Israelites were like the firstfruits of the fig tree (Hos 9:10). Another prophet, Jeremiah, spoke of those who had gone into exile as being like the first figs, while those who were left behind were the bad figs, fit only for destruction (Jer 24:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Figs were usually eaten fresh from the trees, but some were pressed into cakes to use when traveling (1 Sm 25:18; 30:12; 1 Chr 12:40). Figs were also valuable for medicinal purposes, since effective poultices could be made from them (2 Kgs 20:7; Is 38:21). Sycamore trees produced small, figlike fruit eaten primarily by the poor. A short time before harvest, the fruit was slightly incised, making it swell and ripen more quickly. The prophet Amos notched sycamore fruit before he was called by God (Am 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>Fruit from the date palm could also have been pressed into flat cakes for travelers, as figs were. The Bible, however, makes no specific reference to its fruit as food (see Jgs 4:5; Ps 92:12; Jl 1:12; Jn 12:13).<\/p>\n<p>Another popular Near Eastern fruit was the red pomegranate. It was eaten whole, or the seeds were pressed to provide a refreshing drink. The pomegranate is mentioned in temple ritual as one of the fruits brought back from Canaan to Moses by his spies (Ex 28:33) and as an exotic drink (Sg 8:2). The “apple” mentioned in Scripture (Prv 25:11; Sg 2:5) was most likely a type of apricot or quince, not an apple as we know it today. Nuts were used for additional flavor in cooking. Almonds and pistachio nuts were among the gifts sent by Jacob to ransom his sons (Gn 43:11).<\/p>\n<p>Grapes were popular and plentiful from the early Bronze Age. In addition to being eaten fresh from the vine, grapes were dried as raisins (Nm 6:3; 1 Sm 25:18) or pressed, their juice drunk either as new wine or fermented into an alcoholic drink. One of the duties of the cup-bearer in ancient royal courts was to provide grape juice or wine for the king, his family, and guests (Gn 40:9-13).<\/p>\n<p>The juice of grapes also provided vinegar when wine deteriorated. Vinegar was used as a flavoring agent in cooking and as a preservative. When diluted with water, it supplied a refreshing drink for workers in the fields. A type of jelly was made in the Near East by boiling grapes until they assumed the consistency of molasses. This syrup could also be used as a sweetening agent in cooking.<\/p>\n<p>Wine was the universal drink in antiquity. It could be diluted with water or mixed with spices or honey to make a mulled wine (Sg 8:2; Is 5:22). The Hebrew word for “banquet” or “feast” literally means “drinking,” which reveals much of the character of such occasions. A certain amount of merriment was considered proper at a festival or banquet (Gn 43:34; Jgs 9:13; Lk 5:34).<\/p>\n<p>Wine making was similar in many respects to the production of olive oil. Clusters of grapes were cut from the vine with a sickle, collected in baskets, and taken to the winepress, where they were trodden by men and women. The juice ran into a lower vat, where, under the hot sun, fermentation began almost immediately. The wine was left to settle so that any twigs or skins would form a sediment; after that the wine could be strained off. In about six weeks the wine was ready to drink or store in earthenware jars or wineskins.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Animals; Bread; Family Life and Relations; Leaven; Meals, Significance of; Plants; Unleavened Bread.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FOOD AND FOOD PREPARATION Substances required by the body to sustain life, and the methods of making them edible. Food consumed in Bible times included bread, milk products, fruit, meat, and fish. Food was also offered sacrificially or given as gifts. The availability of food was a perpetual concern because of the recurrent scarcity: droughts were frequent (2 Kgs 4:38; Jer 14:1, 4-6; Hg 1:11), hailstorms wrought devastation among crops (Hg 2:17), farming was frequently interrupted by warfare ...","summary_en":"FOOD AND FOOD PREPARATION Substances required by the body to sustain life, and the methods of making them edible. Food consumed in Bible times included bread, milk products, fruit, meat, and fish. Food was also offered sacrificially or given as gifts. The availability of food was a perpetual concern because of the recurrent scarcity: droughts were frequent (2 Kgs 4:38; Jer 14:1, 4-6; Hg 1:11), hailstorms wrought devastation among crops (Hg 2:17), farming was frequently interrupted by warfare ...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20180,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of John","title_en":"Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","summary_en":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56428,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:9","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:9","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:9<\/strong> <em>Barley<\/em> was the grain of the poor. The <em>loaves<\/em> were similar to pita bread. The <em>two fish<\/em> would have been salted, and with the <em>five<\/em> loaves of bread would make one meal.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:9<\/strong> <em>Barley<\/em> was the grain of the poor. The <em>loaves<\/em> were similar to pita bread. The <em>two fish<\/em> would have been salted, and with the <em>five<\/em> loaves of bread would make one meal.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:9 Barley was the grain of the poor. The loaves were similar to pita bread. The two fish would have been salted, and with the five loaves of bread would make one meal.","summary_en":"6:9 Barley was the grain of the poor. The loaves were similar to pita bread. The two fish would have been salted, and with the five loaves of bread would make one meal.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84054,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:9","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:9","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:9<\/strong> <em>Barley<\/em> was the grain of the poor. The <em>loaves<\/em> were similar to pita bread. The <em>two fish<\/em> would have been salted, and with the <em>five<\/em> loaves of bread would make one meal.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:9<\/strong> <em>Barley<\/em> was the grain of the poor. The <em>loaves<\/em> were similar to pita bread. The <em>two fish<\/em> would have been salted, and with the <em>five<\/em> loaves of bread would make one meal.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:9 Barley was the grain of the poor. The loaves were similar to pita bread. The two fish would have been salted, and with the five loaves of bread would make one meal.","summary_en":"6:9 Barley was the grain of the poor. The loaves were similar to pita bread. The two fish would have been salted, and with the five loaves of bread would make one meal.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111680,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:9","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:9","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:9<\/strong> <em>Barley<\/em> was the grain of the poor. The <em>loaves<\/em> were similar to pita bread. The <em>two fish<\/em> would have been salted, and with the <em>five<\/em> loaves of bread would make one meal.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:9<\/strong> <em>Barley<\/em> was the grain of the poor. The <em>loaves<\/em> were similar to pita bread. The <em>two fish<\/em> would have been salted, and with the <em>five<\/em> loaves of bread would make one meal.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:9 Barley was the grain of the poor. The loaves were similar to pita bread. The two fish would have been salted, and with the five loaves of bread would make one meal.","summary_en":"6:9 Barley was the grain of the poor. The loaves were similar to pita bread. The two fish would have been salted, and with the five loaves of bread would make one meal.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139306,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:9","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:9","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:9<\/strong> <em>Barley<\/em> was the grain of the poor. The <em>loaves<\/em> were similar to pita bread. The <em>two fish<\/em> would have been salted, and with the <em>five<\/em> loaves of bread would make one meal.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:9<\/strong> <em>Barley<\/em> was the grain of the poor. The <em>loaves<\/em> were similar to pita bread. The <em>two fish<\/em> would have been salted, and with the <em>five<\/em> loaves of bread would make one meal.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:9 Barley was the grain of the poor. The loaves were similar to pita bread. The two fish would have been salted, and with the five loaves of bread would make one meal.","summary_en":"6:9 Barley was the grain of the poor. The loaves were similar to pita bread. The two fish would have been salted, and with the five loaves of bread would make one meal.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":56429,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:10","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:10<\/strong> The headcount of <em>about 5,000<\/em> reflected the <em>men alone<\/em> (Matt 14:21), as social custom dictated. With women and children included, the total number was far greater.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:10<\/strong> The headcount of <em>about 5,000<\/em> reflected the <em>men alone<\/em> (Matt 14:21), as social custom dictated. With women and children included, the total number was far greater.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:10 The headcount of about 5,000 reflected the men alone (Matt 14:21), as social custom dictated. With women and children included, the total number was far greater.","summary_en":"6:10 The headcount of about 5,000 reflected the men alone (Matt 14:21), as social custom dictated. With women and children included, the total number was far greater.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84055,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:10","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:10<\/strong> The headcount of <em>about 5,000<\/em> reflected the <em>men alone<\/em> (Matt 14:21), as social custom dictated. With women and children included, the total number was far greater.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:10<\/strong> The headcount of <em>about 5,000<\/em> reflected the <em>men alone<\/em> (Matt 14:21), as social custom dictated. With women and children included, the total number was far greater.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:10 The headcount of about 5,000 reflected the men alone (Matt 14:21), as social custom dictated. With women and children included, the total number was far greater.","summary_en":"6:10 The headcount of about 5,000 reflected the men alone (Matt 14:21), as social custom dictated. With women and children included, the total number was far greater.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111681,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:10","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:10<\/strong> The headcount of <em>about 5,000<\/em> reflected the <em>men alone<\/em> (Matt 14:21), as social custom dictated. With women and children included, the total number was far greater.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:10<\/strong> The headcount of <em>about 5,000<\/em> reflected the <em>men alone<\/em> (Matt 14:21), as social custom dictated. With women and children included, the total number was far greater.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:10 The headcount of about 5,000 reflected the men alone (Matt 14:21), as social custom dictated. With women and children included, the total number was far greater.","summary_en":"6:10 The headcount of about 5,000 reflected the men alone (Matt 14:21), as social custom dictated. With women and children included, the total number was far greater.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139307,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:10","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:10<\/strong> The headcount of <em>about 5,000<\/em> reflected the <em>men alone<\/em> (Matt 14:21), as social custom dictated. With women and children included, the total number was far greater.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:10<\/strong> The headcount of <em>about 5,000<\/em> reflected the <em>men alone<\/em> (Matt 14:21), as social custom dictated. With women and children included, the total number was far greater.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:10 The headcount of about 5,000 reflected the men alone (Matt 14:21), as social custom dictated. With women and children included, the total number was far greater.","summary_en":"6:10 The headcount of about 5,000 reflected the men alone (Matt 14:21), as social custom dictated. With women and children included, the total number was far greater.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"11":[{"id":56430,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:11","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:11","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:11<\/strong> The modest meal provided the crowd with <em>as much as they wanted,<\/em> echoing the miraculous provision of manna in the wilderness (Exod 16:35). Moses had first supplied Israel with heavenly bread; Jesus was the new supplier.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:11<\/strong> The modest meal provided the crowd with <em>as much as they wanted,<\/em> echoing the miraculous provision of manna in the wilderness (Exod 16:35). Moses had first supplied Israel with heavenly bread; Jesus was the new supplier.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:11 The modest meal provided the crowd with as much as they wanted, echoing the miraculous provision of manna in the wilderness (Exod 16:35). Moses had first supplied Israel with heavenly bread; Jesus was the new supplier.","summary_en":"6:11 The modest meal provided the crowd with as much as they wanted, echoing the miraculous provision of manna in the wilderness (Exod 16:35). Moses had first supplied Israel with heavenly bread; Jesus was the new supplier.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84056,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:11","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:11","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:11<\/strong> The modest meal provided the crowd with <em>as much as they wanted,<\/em> echoing the miraculous provision of manna in the wilderness (Exod 16:35). Moses had first supplied Israel with heavenly bread; Jesus was the new supplier.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:11<\/strong> The modest meal provided the crowd with <em>as much as they wanted,<\/em> echoing the miraculous provision of manna in the wilderness (Exod 16:35). Moses had first supplied Israel with heavenly bread; Jesus was the new supplier.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:11 The modest meal provided the crowd with as much as they wanted, echoing the miraculous provision of manna in the wilderness (Exod 16:35). Moses had first supplied Israel with heavenly bread; Jesus was the new supplier.","summary_en":"6:11 The modest meal provided the crowd with as much as they wanted, echoing the miraculous provision of manna in the wilderness (Exod 16:35). Moses had first supplied Israel with heavenly bread; Jesus was the new supplier.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111682,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:11","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:11","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:11<\/strong> The modest meal provided the crowd with <em>as much as they wanted,<\/em> echoing the miraculous provision of manna in the wilderness (Exod 16:35). Moses had first supplied Israel with heavenly bread; Jesus was the new supplier.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:11<\/strong> The modest meal provided the crowd with <em>as much as they wanted,<\/em> echoing the miraculous provision of manna in the wilderness (Exod 16:35). Moses had first supplied Israel with heavenly bread; Jesus was the new supplier.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:11 The modest meal provided the crowd with as much as they wanted, echoing the miraculous provision of manna in the wilderness (Exod 16:35). Moses had first supplied Israel with heavenly bread; Jesus was the new supplier.","summary_en":"6:11 The modest meal provided the crowd with as much as they wanted, echoing the miraculous provision of manna in the wilderness (Exod 16:35). Moses had first supplied Israel with heavenly bread; Jesus was the new supplier.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139308,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:11","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:11","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:11<\/strong> The modest meal provided the crowd with <em>as much as they wanted,<\/em> echoing the miraculous provision of manna in the wilderness (Exod 16:35). Moses had first supplied Israel with heavenly bread; Jesus was the new supplier.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:11<\/strong> The modest meal provided the crowd with <em>as much as they wanted,<\/em> echoing the miraculous provision of manna in the wilderness (Exod 16:35). Moses had first supplied Israel with heavenly bread; Jesus was the new supplier.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:11 The modest meal provided the crowd with as much as they wanted, echoing the miraculous provision of manna in the wilderness (Exod 16:35). Moses had first supplied Israel with heavenly bread; Jesus was the new supplier.","summary_en":"6:11 The modest meal provided the crowd with as much as they wanted, echoing the miraculous provision of manna in the wilderness (Exod 16:35). Moses had first supplied Israel with heavenly bread; Jesus was the new supplier.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"14":[{"id":6319,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Christ","title_en":"Christ","content_ro":"<h3>CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Christos<\/span><em>,<\/em> which translates Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Messiah<\/span> (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the title is used in combination with the given name, as “Jesus Christ” (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Rom 1:4), “Christ Jesus” (<span>niv<\/span> Rom 1:1; 1 Cor 1:1), with the article “the” (Rom 7:4), or with another title “Lord” (Rom 16:18). It is also used alone as the one favored substitute name or title for Jesus (Jn 20:31; Rom 15:3; Heb 3:6; 5:5; 1 Pt 1:11, 19).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels portray Jesus as modestly accepting the title and role of the Messiah. His baptism should be understood as his anointing to the threefold office of prophet, priest, and king. At his baptism by John (the new Elijah, Mt 11:14), Jesus received the outpouring of the Spirit and God’s mandate to begin his ministry (Mt 3:16–4:17). John himself denied being the anointed one but tacitly identified Jesus as the Christ (Jn 1:20; Lk 3:14-17). Jesus’ first disciples followed him because they knew he was the Messiah (Jn 1:41). The demons recognized him as “the Holy One [anointed] of God” (Mk 1:24; cf. Mt 8:29). The crowds followed him as the Prophet, the new Moses (Jn 6:14, 32), but deserted him when they understood that his kingdom was a spiritual, not a political realm (v 66). The Twelve remained loyal, saying, “We believe . . . you are the Holy One of God” (Jn 6:69, <span>niv<\/span>). The confession of the disciples voiced by Peter and approved by Jesus as a divine revelation is “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16, <span>niv<\/span>). At his trials the decisive factor in Jesus’ condemnation was his claim to be the Christ (Mt 26:63-64, 68; 27:11, 17, 22, 37).<\/p>\n<p>An important feature in the earliest Christian preaching was the proclamation that Jesus is the Christ (Acts 2:36; 3:18-20; 9:22; 28:23, 31). This remains the earliest (Mt 16:16) and most basic article of Christian confession (1 Cor 1:23; 1 Jn 5:1), affirming that Jesus perfectly fulfilled the role of anointed prophet, priest, and king as the servant of God for his people (Lk 7:16; 1 Cor 15:25; Heb 7:22-28; Rv 19:16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Messiah.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Christos<\/span><em>,<\/em> which translates Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Messiah<\/span> (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the title is used in combination with the given name, as “Jesus Christ” (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Rom 1:4), “Christ Jesus” (<span>niv<\/span> Rom 1:1; 1 Cor 1:1), with the article “the” (Rom 7:4), or with another title “Lord” (Rom 16:18). It is also used alone as the one favored substitute name or title for Jesus (Jn 20:31; Rom 15:3; Heb 3:6; 5:5; 1 Pt 1:11, 19).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels portray Jesus as modestly accepting the title and role of the Messiah. His baptism should be understood as his anointing to the threefold office of prophet, priest, and king. At his baptism by John (the new Elijah, Mt 11:14), Jesus received the outpouring of the Spirit and God’s mandate to begin his ministry (Mt 3:16–4:17). John himself denied being the anointed one but tacitly identified Jesus as the Christ (Jn 1:20; Lk 3:14-17). Jesus’ first disciples followed him because they knew he was the Messiah (Jn 1:41). The demons recognized him as “the Holy One [anointed] of God” (Mk 1:24; cf. Mt 8:29). The crowds followed him as the Prophet, the new Moses (Jn 6:14, 32), but deserted him when they understood that his kingdom was a spiritual, not a political realm (v 66). The Twelve remained loyal, saying, “We believe . . . you are the Holy One of God” (Jn 6:69, <span>niv<\/span>). The confession of the disciples voiced by Peter and approved by Jesus as a divine revelation is “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16, <span>niv<\/span>). At his trials the decisive factor in Jesus’ condemnation was his claim to be the Christ (Mt 26:63-64, 68; 27:11, 17, 22, 37).<\/p>\n<p>An important feature in the earliest Christian preaching was the proclamation that Jesus is the Christ (Acts 2:36; 3:18-20; 9:22; 28:23, 31). This remains the earliest (Mt 16:16) and most basic article of Christian confession (1 Cor 1:23; 1 Jn 5:1), affirming that Jesus perfectly fulfilled the role of anointed prophet, priest, and king as the servant of God for his people (Lk 7:16; 1 Cor 15:25; Heb 7:22-28; Rv 19:16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Messiah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CHRIST Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek Christos, which translates Hebrew Messiah (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function. In the NT the title is used i...","summary_en":"CHRIST Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek Christos, which translates Hebrew Messiah (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function. In the NT the title is used i...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":25491,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Messiah","title_en":"Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>MESSIAH<\/h3>\n<p>Title derived from the Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiach<\/span><em>,<\/em> a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashach<\/span><em>)<\/em> conveys this idea as well.<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). While there is evidence for a literal anointing of prophets (1 Kgs 19:16), this does not appear to have been a standard practice. The anointing of Saul and David by Samuel established the act as a significant prerequisite for Hebrew kings before they assumed their positions of royal leadership. The king was especially considered to be the Lord’s anointed and as such was viewed to hold a secure position before men (1 Sm 12:14; 2 Sm 19:21) and God (Pss 2:2; 20:6). Along with numerous messianic prophecies, these proceedings helped inform the Jews of the Anointed One, par excellence, who would eventually come to bring salvation to Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Concluding the 13 articles of Hebraic faith attributed to Moses Maimonides (13th century <span>AD<\/span>) is the statement still found in many Hebrew prayer books: “I believe with a perfect heart that the Messiah will come; and although his coming be delayed, I will still wait patiently for his speedy appearance.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheOldTestament\">Messiah in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jewish hope for the advent of the Messiah developed dynamically from the period of David’s reign, when it was prophesied that his kingdom would endure to the end of time (2 Sm 7:16). Israel was told that, through David’s descendants, his throne would exert a never-ending dominion over all the earth (2 Sm 22:48-51; Jer 33). It is with this aspect of messianic salvation that Jewish minds have traditionally been preoccupied (cf. Acts 1:6).<\/p>\n<p>Among Orthodox rabbis there has never been a lack of conjecture respecting the details of the Messiah’s ministry. At one time the rabbis applied no less than 456 passages of Scripture to his person and salvation. Preoccupation with the Messiah is evident in the tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> (Babylonian Talmud), where passages state that the world was created for him and that all the prophets prophesied of his days (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, 99a). By and large, Orthodoxy still retains its time-worn belief in the Messiah’s reign in Jerusalem, the rebuilding of the temple, and the reestablishment of both priesthood and sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>While later Judaism looked for the Messiah as an eschatological figure who will reign at the end of time, modern Jewish thought has largely jettisoned the traditional notion of a personal Messiah in favor of belief in a messianic age. Prevalent liberal Judaism envisions the world ultimately perfected through the influence of the twin Judaic ideals of justice and compassion. Such conviction, ignoring the plight of fallen humans and the teaching of Scripture, substitutes humanistic thinking for miraculous heavenly intervention.<\/p>\n<p>While the Messiah’s origin is linked firmly to the house of David (2 Sm 7:14; Hos 3:5), the promise for a Messiah was given long before David lived. In fact, the hope for the Messiah is implicit in the first promise of the establishment of the kingdom of God. Addressed to Satan, Genesis 3:15 declares that God will place hostility between the serpent and the woman until, in the fullness of time, the “seed” of the woman inflicts a fatal blow to the head of the serpent.<\/p>\n<p>The nature of messianic prophecy is progressive; each prophecy casts more light on the subject. This occurs, for example, respecting the concept of the “seed”: Messiah is to be born of a woman (Gn 3:15), through the line of Shem (9:26) and specifically through Abraham (22:18). Yet even as late as Genesis 22:18, the “seed” is not clearly presented as a person, since <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">zerah<\/span> (seed) may indicate a singular or plural object. Still less apparent in these early stages of messianic prophecy is the nature of the “bruising” that is to occur. Yet the idea of the Messiah being crushed for sin is implicit in the Genesis pronouncement, as is the violence associated with that act. Chief among the messianic prophets, Isaiah gives full range to the axiom that the Anointed One must endure extensive suffering (Is 53:1). Under the figure “the Servant of the Lord,” four “servant songs” delineate the mission of the future deliverer (Is 42:1-7; 49:1-9; 50:4-11; 52:13–53:12). While it is true that Isaiah does not explicitly link the title Messiah with the Servant of the Lord, identifying both figures as one and the same person is justifiable. Both figures are uniquely anointed (61:1); each brings light to the Gentiles (55:4; cf. 49:6); neither is pretentious in his first appearance (7:14-15; 11:1; cf. 42:3; 53:1); and the title of Davidic “branch” rests upon them both (11:1-4). Equally significant are the dual facts of their humiliation and exaltation (49:7; 52:13-15). Jewish scholars of the early Christian era in the Aramaic Targum on the prophets paraphrase Isaiah 42:1, “Behold my Servant Messiah” and begin Isaiah 53, “Behold my Servant Messiah will prosper.” While Cyrus may be spoken of as “anointed,” no final salvific work is attributed to him (45:1-5). Israel, although elect and loved by God (41:8), is ill-equipped as God’s servant to bring his redeeming work to mankind (42:18). The collapse of David’s dynasty points eloquently to Israel’s need for an anointed monarch who will heal the apostasy and disobedience (Ex 33:5; Hos 4:1). More and more, OT history presents Israel’s comprehensive moral failure. Her problem, which she shares with mankind, can only be solved by the making of a covenant whose surety and focal point is both a personal Savior and sovereign Lord (Jer 31:31-34). The advent of such a champion lives in the recorded promise of a shoot from the stump of Jesse’s fallen tree, who will bring the light of life to God’s benighted people (Is 9:2; 11:1).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to get away from the idea that the concept of servanthood and lowliness belongs within the sphere of royalty (Zec 9:9). The concept of the Messiah filling the complementary offices of priest and king is incontrovertible (Ps 110:1-4); a suffering priest-king is far less obvious. Some among the Talmudic writers apparently recognized the likelihood that the Messiah would have to suffer. In the Babylonian Talmud, tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, the Messiah is said to bear sicknesses and pain. Among the prayers for the Day of Atonement may be found the words of Eleazar ben Qalir (perhaps as late as <span>AD<\/span> 1000): “Our righteous Messiah has departed from us; we are horror-stricken, and there is none to justify us. Our iniquities and the yoke of our transgressions he carries, and is wounded for our transgressions. He bears on his shoulders our sins to find pardon for our iniquities. May we be healed by his stripes.” In a similar vein Rabbi Eliyya de Vidas writes, “The meaning of ‘He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities,’ is that since the Messiah bears our iniquities, which produce the effect of His being bruised, it follows that whosoever will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities must endure and suffer for them himself.” For all this, it is highly doubtful that anyone imagined the Messiah would accomplish his salvational work by means of his own death (cf. Is 53:12). When rabbinic speculation failed to satisfactorily harmonize the paradoxical facts of humiliation and exaltation, some hypothesized that God would send a Messiah to suffer as well as a Messiah to reign. Biblically, it is evident that the Anointed One’s terrible ordeal of suffering is but the necessary prelude to infinite glory. He is pictured not only as a great king (52:13; 53:12) but also as humble (53:2), humiliated (52:14), rejected (53:3), and bearing the consequences of mankind’s rebellion (vv 5-6). Yet he is raised up to intercede for, and richly bless, his people (v 12). The Messiah, having accomplished that full obedience that Adam and Israel failed to achieve, will bring Israel and the nations back to God (42:18-19; 49:3, 6).<\/p>\n<p>The writings of Daniel contain important messianic data. Daniel is unique in that he boldly speaks of “Messiah the Prince” (Dn 9:25), identifies him as the “Son of Man” (7:13), and says he suffers (“cut off,” 9:26). This statement of the cutting off (i.e., death) of the Messiah makes possible his work of atonement (9:24). The doctrine of a vicarious substitutionary atonement is the only doctrine of atonement found in the Bible (cf. Lv 17:11). Israel understood that to bear sin meant enduring the consequences, or penalty, for sin (cf. Nm 14:33). The same penal substitution is evident in the working principle of the Messiah’s atoning sacrifice. He is the victim’s substitute to whom is transferred the suffering due the sinner. The penalty having been thus borne vicariously, the suppliant is fully pardoned.<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 22:1 records the plaintive cry of the Messiah bearing man’s penalty for sin (cf. Mt 27:46) as he becomes sin on behalf of his people (2 Cor 5:21). Yet his cry, “My God,” indicates an intimate relationship that cannot be radically severed. Once again the motif of messianic humiliation prior to great exaltation is in view (Ps 22:27). In the so-called “royal psalms” (e.g., 2; 72; 110) it is the priestly intercessor who is also ordained to function as monarch and judge.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah brings the portrait a step further. The one who will enable humans to enter into a salvational covenant with God conveys God’s imputed righteousness: the Messiah, God’s righteous branch, becomes “the Lord our Righteousness.” Paradoxically, under the law no one could be crucified who was not guilty of sin (Dt 21:22). But it is Christ the righteous one who was crucified, thereby forever undermining any supposed legalistic confidence (Dt 21:23; Gal 3:13). More than forgiven, believers are deemed righteous in him (Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>While the birthplace of the Messiah was well established (Mi 5:2), his deity was a hotly contested matter. Although few in ancient Israel disputed the belief in a superhuman Messiah, it is doubtful that anyone imagined him to be “God with us” in the fullest sense of the expression (cf. Heb 1:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheNewTestament\">Messiah in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT writers present the picture that he who was the child of supernatural origins (Is 7:14; Mi 5:2) carried the full weight of divinity (Is 9:6; Phil 2:6; Col 1:19). He is the Son of God, worthy to receive the worship of all people (Ps 45:6-7; cf. Heb 1:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Jews of first-century Palestine knew that the messianic promise would be fulfilled in the coming of one like Moses (Dt 18:18). Parallels between Jesus and Moses are abundant. As mediators, innovators, and propagators of new phases of spiritual life for the people, they are unexcelled. Specifically, both are miraculously spared in infancy (Ex 2; Mt 2:13-23); both renounce a royal court for the sake of serving the people of God (Phil 2:5-8; Heb 11:24-28); both exhibit intense compassion for others (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36); both commune “face to face” with God (Ex 34:29-30; 2 Cor 3:7); and each mediates a covenant of redemption (Dt 29:1; Heb 8:6-7). But, as Luther observes, “Christ is no Moses.” In the final analysis Moses is but a household servant; the Messiah is the maker and master of all things (Heb 3:3-6; cf. Jn 1:1-2, 18).<\/p>\n<p>Family genealogies are important in Scripture. Rabbis agreed upon the absolute necessity of the Messiah’s Davidic lineage based on Hosea 3:5 and Jeremiah 30:9. The angelic announcement immediately establishes the correct lineage for Jesus (Lk 1:32-33; cf. 2:4), as does Matthew’s (Mt 1:1-17). The Lukan list, like that of Matthew, sets forth the exclusive kingly descent verifying Jesus as Messiah (Lk 3:23-38). Although variations occur between the two genealogies, there is a firm solidarity emphasizing an ancestry within the unique messianic stock. Fully aware of the messianic focus of Scripture (Jn 5:46; 8:56), Jesus acknowledged himself to be the Christ on numerous occasions. He accepted the title from blind Bartimaeus (Mk 10:46-48); from the crowds when he entered Jerusalem (Mt 21:9); from the children at the temple (v 15); and in other contexts as well (Mt 16:16-18; Mk 14:61-62; Lk 4:21; Jn 4:25-26). Nonetheless, he warned his disciples not to broadcast his mighty acts as Messiah prior to his resurrection (Mt 17:9; cf. Lk 9:20-21). Owing to the commonly held (but false) notion that the Messiah’s role was primarily that of a political liberator, Jesus actually avoided use of that term and preferred to identify himself as “the Son of Man.” It was by no means assumed that both designations referred to the same person (cf. Mk 14:61-62). Borrowing essentially from Daniel’s vision of a heavenly conqueror (Dn 7:13-14), Jesus consistently employed this less-known title and filled it with the true character and scope of messianic salvation. Jesus’ teaching in this regard enabled his disciples to correct their erroneous views concerning his mission (Mt 16:21-23). In the fullness of time they would come to see him not only as Messiah but also as the theme of the entire OT (Mt 5:17; Lk 24:27, 44; Jn 5:39; cf. Heb 10:7). When Jesus expounded the Scriptures beginning with the Torah (Lk 24:27), he did so as the living exegesis of God, the Word made flesh (Jn 1:14, 18). Legitimate messianic exposition is found in a host of texts, such as Psalms 2; 16; 22; 40; 110; Isaiah 7:14; 9:6; 11:1; 40:10-11; 50:6; 52:13–53:12; 61:1; 63:1-6; Jeremiah 23:5-6; 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:23; 37:25; Daniel 9:24-27; Hosea 11:1; Micah 5:2; Zechariah 9:9; 11:13; 12:10; 13:7; Malachi 3:1; 4:2.<\/p>\n<p>The messiahship of Jesus is firmly proclaimed by all four evangelists (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Lk 24:26; Jn 20:31). Peter on Pentecost, Philip before the Ethiopian eunuch, and Apollos in open debate all argue convincingly that Jesus is the Messiah (Acts 2:36; 8:35; 28:28). Peter says he was “made” both Lord and Christ (2:36), signifying that the resurrection rightfully confirms him as such. Similarly, the apostle Paul speaks of Jesus’ resurrection as a patent declaration of his inalienable right to the title (Rom 1:4). For the ex-Pharisee and former persecutor of the church, “Jesus the Christ” is the very heart and soul of Paul’s preaching. Nothing is worthy to be compared to the glory of the Messiah; everything pales by comparison (Phil 3:5-10). The apostle’s all-consuming passion is for others to know the fullness of God in the person of his only Son (Eph 3:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Holy Spirit in Scripture speaks of Jesus with wide-ranging appellatives—Holy One, Judge, Righteous One, King, Son of God, and Lord—but these are not exhaustive. In him all the lines of messianic prediction converge; he is the touchstone whereby their validity is firmly established. The Lord Jesus Christ is himself the heart and substance of that covenant through which sinful people may be reconciled to a holy God (Is 42:6; Jn 14:6). That Jesus is the Messiah of Israel, God incarnate, exhaustively fulfills prophecy, type, and symbol—all shadows of his coming. Therefore, all should trust in him, the source of all grace, the only abiding treasure (Mt 12:21; Jn 1:16-17; Col 2:3). Anointed as prophet, he leads us into all truth (Jn 6:14; 7:16); as priest he intercedes for us (Heb 7:21); and as king he reigns over us (Phil 2:9-10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Branch; Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Redeemer, Redemption; Son of God; Son of Man.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MESSIAH<\/h3>\n<p>Title derived from the Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiach<\/span><em>,<\/em> a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashach<\/span><em>)<\/em> conveys this idea as well.<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). While there is evidence for a literal anointing of prophets (1 Kgs 19:16), this does not appear to have been a standard practice. The anointing of Saul and David by Samuel established the act as a significant prerequisite for Hebrew kings before they assumed their positions of royal leadership. The king was especially considered to be the Lord’s anointed and as such was viewed to hold a secure position before men (1 Sm 12:14; 2 Sm 19:21) and God (Pss 2:2; 20:6). Along with numerous messianic prophecies, these proceedings helped inform the Jews of the Anointed One, par excellence, who would eventually come to bring salvation to Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Concluding the 13 articles of Hebraic faith attributed to Moses Maimonides (13th century <span>AD<\/span>) is the statement still found in many Hebrew prayer books: “I believe with a perfect heart that the Messiah will come; and although his coming be delayed, I will still wait patiently for his speedy appearance.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheOldTestament\">Messiah in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jewish hope for the advent of the Messiah developed dynamically from the period of David’s reign, when it was prophesied that his kingdom would endure to the end of time (2 Sm 7:16). Israel was told that, through David’s descendants, his throne would exert a never-ending dominion over all the earth (2 Sm 22:48-51; Jer 33). It is with this aspect of messianic salvation that Jewish minds have traditionally been preoccupied (cf. Acts 1:6).<\/p>\n<p>Among Orthodox rabbis there has never been a lack of conjecture respecting the details of the Messiah’s ministry. At one time the rabbis applied no less than 456 passages of Scripture to his person and salvation. Preoccupation with the Messiah is evident in the tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> (Babylonian Talmud), where passages state that the world was created for him and that all the prophets prophesied of his days (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, 99a). By and large, Orthodoxy still retains its time-worn belief in the Messiah’s reign in Jerusalem, the rebuilding of the temple, and the reestablishment of both priesthood and sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>While later Judaism looked for the Messiah as an eschatological figure who will reign at the end of time, modern Jewish thought has largely jettisoned the traditional notion of a personal Messiah in favor of belief in a messianic age. Prevalent liberal Judaism envisions the world ultimately perfected through the influence of the twin Judaic ideals of justice and compassion. Such conviction, ignoring the plight of fallen humans and the teaching of Scripture, substitutes humanistic thinking for miraculous heavenly intervention.<\/p>\n<p>While the Messiah’s origin is linked firmly to the house of David (2 Sm 7:14; Hos 3:5), the promise for a Messiah was given long before David lived. In fact, the hope for the Messiah is implicit in the first promise of the establishment of the kingdom of God. Addressed to Satan, Genesis 3:15 declares that God will place hostility between the serpent and the woman until, in the fullness of time, the “seed” of the woman inflicts a fatal blow to the head of the serpent.<\/p>\n<p>The nature of messianic prophecy is progressive; each prophecy casts more light on the subject. This occurs, for example, respecting the concept of the “seed”: Messiah is to be born of a woman (Gn 3:15), through the line of Shem (9:26) and specifically through Abraham (22:18). Yet even as late as Genesis 22:18, the “seed” is not clearly presented as a person, since <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">zerah<\/span> (seed) may indicate a singular or plural object. Still less apparent in these early stages of messianic prophecy is the nature of the “bruising” that is to occur. Yet the idea of the Messiah being crushed for sin is implicit in the Genesis pronouncement, as is the violence associated with that act. Chief among the messianic prophets, Isaiah gives full range to the axiom that the Anointed One must endure extensive suffering (Is 53:1). Under the figure “the Servant of the Lord,” four “servant songs” delineate the mission of the future deliverer (Is 42:1-7; 49:1-9; 50:4-11; 52:13–53:12). While it is true that Isaiah does not explicitly link the title Messiah with the Servant of the Lord, identifying both figures as one and the same person is justifiable. Both figures are uniquely anointed (61:1); each brings light to the Gentiles (55:4; cf. 49:6); neither is pretentious in his first appearance (7:14-15; 11:1; cf. 42:3; 53:1); and the title of Davidic “branch” rests upon them both (11:1-4). Equally significant are the dual facts of their humiliation and exaltation (49:7; 52:13-15). Jewish scholars of the early Christian era in the Aramaic Targum on the prophets paraphrase Isaiah 42:1, “Behold my Servant Messiah” and begin Isaiah 53, “Behold my Servant Messiah will prosper.” While Cyrus may be spoken of as “anointed,” no final salvific work is attributed to him (45:1-5). Israel, although elect and loved by God (41:8), is ill-equipped as God’s servant to bring his redeeming work to mankind (42:18). The collapse of David’s dynasty points eloquently to Israel’s need for an anointed monarch who will heal the apostasy and disobedience (Ex 33:5; Hos 4:1). More and more, OT history presents Israel’s comprehensive moral failure. Her problem, which she shares with mankind, can only be solved by the making of a covenant whose surety and focal point is both a personal Savior and sovereign Lord (Jer 31:31-34). The advent of such a champion lives in the recorded promise of a shoot from the stump of Jesse’s fallen tree, who will bring the light of life to God’s benighted people (Is 9:2; 11:1).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to get away from the idea that the concept of servanthood and lowliness belongs within the sphere of royalty (Zec 9:9). The concept of the Messiah filling the complementary offices of priest and king is incontrovertible (Ps 110:1-4); a suffering priest-king is far less obvious. Some among the Talmudic writers apparently recognized the likelihood that the Messiah would have to suffer. In the Babylonian Talmud, tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, the Messiah is said to bear sicknesses and pain. Among the prayers for the Day of Atonement may be found the words of Eleazar ben Qalir (perhaps as late as <span>AD<\/span> 1000): “Our righteous Messiah has departed from us; we are horror-stricken, and there is none to justify us. Our iniquities and the yoke of our transgressions he carries, and is wounded for our transgressions. He bears on his shoulders our sins to find pardon for our iniquities. May we be healed by his stripes.” In a similar vein Rabbi Eliyya de Vidas writes, “The meaning of ‘He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities,’ is that since the Messiah bears our iniquities, which produce the effect of His being bruised, it follows that whosoever will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities must endure and suffer for them himself.” For all this, it is highly doubtful that anyone imagined the Messiah would accomplish his salvational work by means of his own death (cf. Is 53:12). When rabbinic speculation failed to satisfactorily harmonize the paradoxical facts of humiliation and exaltation, some hypothesized that God would send a Messiah to suffer as well as a Messiah to reign. Biblically, it is evident that the Anointed One’s terrible ordeal of suffering is but the necessary prelude to infinite glory. He is pictured not only as a great king (52:13; 53:12) but also as humble (53:2), humiliated (52:14), rejected (53:3), and bearing the consequences of mankind’s rebellion (vv 5-6). Yet he is raised up to intercede for, and richly bless, his people (v 12). The Messiah, having accomplished that full obedience that Adam and Israel failed to achieve, will bring Israel and the nations back to God (42:18-19; 49:3, 6).<\/p>\n<p>The writings of Daniel contain important messianic data. Daniel is unique in that he boldly speaks of “Messiah the Prince” (Dn 9:25), identifies him as the “Son of Man” (7:13), and says he suffers (“cut off,” 9:26). This statement of the cutting off (i.e., death) of the Messiah makes possible his work of atonement (9:24). The doctrine of a vicarious substitutionary atonement is the only doctrine of atonement found in the Bible (cf. Lv 17:11). Israel understood that to bear sin meant enduring the consequences, or penalty, for sin (cf. Nm 14:33). The same penal substitution is evident in the working principle of the Messiah’s atoning sacrifice. He is the victim’s substitute to whom is transferred the suffering due the sinner. The penalty having been thus borne vicariously, the suppliant is fully pardoned.<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 22:1 records the plaintive cry of the Messiah bearing man’s penalty for sin (cf. Mt 27:46) as he becomes sin on behalf of his people (2 Cor 5:21). Yet his cry, “My God,” indicates an intimate relationship that cannot be radically severed. Once again the motif of messianic humiliation prior to great exaltation is in view (Ps 22:27). In the so-called “royal psalms” (e.g., 2; 72; 110) it is the priestly intercessor who is also ordained to function as monarch and judge.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah brings the portrait a step further. The one who will enable humans to enter into a salvational covenant with God conveys God’s imputed righteousness: the Messiah, God’s righteous branch, becomes “the Lord our Righteousness.” Paradoxically, under the law no one could be crucified who was not guilty of sin (Dt 21:22). But it is Christ the righteous one who was crucified, thereby forever undermining any supposed legalistic confidence (Dt 21:23; Gal 3:13). More than forgiven, believers are deemed righteous in him (Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>While the birthplace of the Messiah was well established (Mi 5:2), his deity was a hotly contested matter. Although few in ancient Israel disputed the belief in a superhuman Messiah, it is doubtful that anyone imagined him to be “God with us” in the fullest sense of the expression (cf. Heb 1:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheNewTestament\">Messiah in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT writers present the picture that he who was the child of supernatural origins (Is 7:14; Mi 5:2) carried the full weight of divinity (Is 9:6; Phil 2:6; Col 1:19). He is the Son of God, worthy to receive the worship of all people (Ps 45:6-7; cf. Heb 1:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Jews of first-century Palestine knew that the messianic promise would be fulfilled in the coming of one like Moses (Dt 18:18). Parallels between Jesus and Moses are abundant. As mediators, innovators, and propagators of new phases of spiritual life for the people, they are unexcelled. Specifically, both are miraculously spared in infancy (Ex 2; Mt 2:13-23); both renounce a royal court for the sake of serving the people of God (Phil 2:5-8; Heb 11:24-28); both exhibit intense compassion for others (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36); both commune “face to face” with God (Ex 34:29-30; 2 Cor 3:7); and each mediates a covenant of redemption (Dt 29:1; Heb 8:6-7). But, as Luther observes, “Christ is no Moses.” In the final analysis Moses is but a household servant; the Messiah is the maker and master of all things (Heb 3:3-6; cf. Jn 1:1-2, 18).<\/p>\n<p>Family genealogies are important in Scripture. Rabbis agreed upon the absolute necessity of the Messiah’s Davidic lineage based on Hosea 3:5 and Jeremiah 30:9. The angelic announcement immediately establishes the correct lineage for Jesus (Lk 1:32-33; cf. 2:4), as does Matthew’s (Mt 1:1-17). The Lukan list, like that of Matthew, sets forth the exclusive kingly descent verifying Jesus as Messiah (Lk 3:23-38). Although variations occur between the two genealogies, there is a firm solidarity emphasizing an ancestry within the unique messianic stock. Fully aware of the messianic focus of Scripture (Jn 5:46; 8:56), Jesus acknowledged himself to be the Christ on numerous occasions. He accepted the title from blind Bartimaeus (Mk 10:46-48); from the crowds when he entered Jerusalem (Mt 21:9); from the children at the temple (v 15); and in other contexts as well (Mt 16:16-18; Mk 14:61-62; Lk 4:21; Jn 4:25-26). Nonetheless, he warned his disciples not to broadcast his mighty acts as Messiah prior to his resurrection (Mt 17:9; cf. Lk 9:20-21). Owing to the commonly held (but false) notion that the Messiah’s role was primarily that of a political liberator, Jesus actually avoided use of that term and preferred to identify himself as “the Son of Man.” It was by no means assumed that both designations referred to the same person (cf. Mk 14:61-62). Borrowing essentially from Daniel’s vision of a heavenly conqueror (Dn 7:13-14), Jesus consistently employed this less-known title and filled it with the true character and scope of messianic salvation. Jesus’ teaching in this regard enabled his disciples to correct their erroneous views concerning his mission (Mt 16:21-23). In the fullness of time they would come to see him not only as Messiah but also as the theme of the entire OT (Mt 5:17; Lk 24:27, 44; Jn 5:39; cf. Heb 10:7). When Jesus expounded the Scriptures beginning with the Torah (Lk 24:27), he did so as the living exegesis of God, the Word made flesh (Jn 1:14, 18). Legitimate messianic exposition is found in a host of texts, such as Psalms 2; 16; 22; 40; 110; Isaiah 7:14; 9:6; 11:1; 40:10-11; 50:6; 52:13–53:12; 61:1; 63:1-6; Jeremiah 23:5-6; 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:23; 37:25; Daniel 9:24-27; Hosea 11:1; Micah 5:2; Zechariah 9:9; 11:13; 12:10; 13:7; Malachi 3:1; 4:2.<\/p>\n<p>The messiahship of Jesus is firmly proclaimed by all four evangelists (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Lk 24:26; Jn 20:31). Peter on Pentecost, Philip before the Ethiopian eunuch, and Apollos in open debate all argue convincingly that Jesus is the Messiah (Acts 2:36; 8:35; 28:28). Peter says he was “made” both Lord and Christ (2:36), signifying that the resurrection rightfully confirms him as such. Similarly, the apostle Paul speaks of Jesus’ resurrection as a patent declaration of his inalienable right to the title (Rom 1:4). For the ex-Pharisee and former persecutor of the church, “Jesus the Christ” is the very heart and soul of Paul’s preaching. Nothing is worthy to be compared to the glory of the Messiah; everything pales by comparison (Phil 3:5-10). The apostle’s all-consuming passion is for others to know the fullness of God in the person of his only Son (Eph 3:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Holy Spirit in Scripture speaks of Jesus with wide-ranging appellatives—Holy One, Judge, Righteous One, King, Son of God, and Lord—but these are not exhaustive. In him all the lines of messianic prediction converge; he is the touchstone whereby their validity is firmly established. The Lord Jesus Christ is himself the heart and substance of that covenant through which sinful people may be reconciled to a holy God (Is 42:6; Jn 14:6). That Jesus is the Messiah of Israel, God incarnate, exhaustively fulfills prophecy, type, and symbol—all shadows of his coming. Therefore, all should trust in him, the source of all grace, the only abiding treasure (Mt 12:21; Jn 1:16-17; Col 2:3). Anointed as prophet, he leads us into all truth (Jn 6:14; 7:16); as priest he intercedes for us (Heb 7:21); and as king he reigns over us (Phil 2:9-10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Branch; Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Redeemer, Redemption; Son of God; Son of Man.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MESSIAH Title derived from the Hebrew, mashiach, a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, christos (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root (mashach) conveys this idea as well. Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). ...","summary_en":"MESSIAH Title derived from the Hebrew, mashiach, a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, christos (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root (mashach) conveys this idea as well. Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31584,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Prophecy","title_en":"Prophecy","content_ro":"<h3>PROPHECY<\/h3>\n<p>Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheOldTestament\">Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>One of the clearest and most significant statements on the nature of prophetic inspiration in the OT is found in Numbers 12:6-8: “The <span>Lord<\/span> said to them, ‘Now listen to me! Even with prophets, I the <span>Lord<\/span> communicate by visions and dreams. But that is not how I communicate with my servant Moses. He is entrusted with my entire house. I speak to him face to face, directly and not in riddles! He sees the <span>Lord<\/span> as he is’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Several important insights into the nature of prophetic inspiration are found in this passage: (1) The prophetic gift of Moses was unique in that he alone received revelations directly from God. (2) Ordinarily, prophetic revelation was received through the medium of a dream or a vision. (3) The meaning of prophetic revelation is not always completely clear; prophecy is sometimes ambiguous.<\/p>\n<p>Further insight into the nature of prophetic revelation is found in Deuteronomy 18:18: “I [God] will raise up for them a prophet like you [Moses] from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him” (<span>rsv<\/span>). While this passage is of interest because Jesus was identified as “the prophet like Moses” who came in fulfillment of this prediction (Acts 3:22; 7:37), the more immediate historical reference is to the succession of prophets that guided Israel from Joshua to Malachi. The phrase “I will put my words in his mouth” refers to the process of divine inspiration and is reminiscent of the common OT prophetic formula “the word of the Lord came to [such and such a prophet]” (for examples, see 1 Sm 15:10; 2 Sm 24:11; 1 Kgs 19:9; Jon 1:1; Hg 1:1; 2:1, 20; Zec 7:1, 8; 8:1). A true prophet is one who speaks (or repeats) all that God has told him.<\/p>\n<h5>Modes of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>Dreams were a commonly recognized mode of inspiration throughout the ancient world, though they were more highly regarded in Greece than in ancient Israel. Revelatory dreams in the Bible fall into two major categories: (1) dreams whose meaning is self-evident, and (2) symbolic dreams that usually require the expertise of an interpreter of dreams. Both types normally involve both visual and auditory elements. In those dreams whose meaning is self-evident, normally a supernatural being (God or an angel) appears to the dreamer and speaks to him or her in a straightforward manner.<\/p>\n<p>More frequently, revelatory dreams have symbolic elements that require interpretation. The two great dream interpreters of the OT are Joseph and Daniel; the latter is clearly a prophet. The two symbolic dreams that Joseph himself dreamed (Gn 37:5-11) had sufficiently self-evident meaning so that his brothers and father were able to interpret them immediately. More complex were the dreams of the butler and baker (40:1-19) and of Pharaoh (41:1-36), which Joseph was able to interpret with the help of God. Similarly, Daniel was enabled to interpret the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar (Dn 2:25-45; 4:4-27). The skill in interpreting such dreams was attributed by both Joseph and Daniel to God (Gn 40:8; 41:16, 25; Dn 2:27-30; cf. 4:9). While dreams are used almost interchangeably with visions in referring to modes of prophetic inspiration (Jl 2:28), dreams do not occupy a significant part in the prophetic revelations of any of the OT prophets, with the exception of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic modes of prophetic inspiration was the vision (Nm 12:6; 24:4, 16; Hos 12:10). The revelatory visions experienced by the prophets were not limited to visual phenomena alone but also included the auditory dimension as well. In Isaiah 1:1, the author describes his entire prophetic book as a “vision”: “These visions concerning Judah and Jerusalem came to Isaiah son of Amoz during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah—all kings of Judah” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Yet in the very next verse, Isaiah says, “Hear, O heavens! Listen, O earth! This is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says.” Again, in Amos 1:1, “The <em>words<\/em> of Amos, who was among the shepherds of Tekoa, which he <em>saw<\/em> concerning Israel” (<span>rsv<\/span>, emphasis added).<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>All prophecy, whether biblical or not, presupposes that the prophet either possessed or was possessed by a personal supernatural power. The external behavioral manifestations of this possession can exhibit great variety.<\/p>\n<p>The prophetic phenomenon generally designated “ecstatic” prophecy appears to have existed in Canaan prior to the arrival of the Hebrew tribes in the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. The first reference to ecstatic prophecy in Israel occurs in 1 Samuel 10:5-13 (11th century <span>BC<\/span>), and it persisted at least till the sixth century <span>BC<\/span> (Jer 29:26).<\/p>\n<p>The ecstatic prophet achieves a trancelike state by self-induced means. The most common devices used to achieve a state of ecstasy were musical instruments, such as the harp, tambourine, flute, and lyre (1 Sm 10:5). Among the prophets of Baal, self-flagellation was another means of inducing ecstasy (1 Kgs 18:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>This kind of prophetic ecstasy was usually practiced by groups of prophets (1 Sm 10:5), and such ecstasy was contagious. When Saul met a band of such prophets, the Spirit of God came upon him and he, too, began to prophesy (vv 10-13), a phenomenon that occurred repeatedly to various messengers sent by Saul on a later occasion (19:20-22). At that time Saul again prophesied, and his ecstatic behavior is described in 1 Samuel 19:24. When Elisha was asked to prophesy for King Jehoram of Israel, he first requested a minstrel. When the minstrel played, the power of the Lord came upon him (2 Kgs 3:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofOldTestamentProphets\">Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>There are two basic types of prophetic commission in the OT. One type is that of a narrative call by God to a particular individual whose objections to the call are gradually overcome in a dialogue between himself and God. The classic example of this type of prophetic commission is found in Jeremiah 1:4-8:<\/p>\n<p>The <span>Lord<\/span> gave me a message. He said, “I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb. Before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as my spokesman to the world.”<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>“O Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span>,” I said, “I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>“Don’t say that,” the <span>Lord<\/span> replied, “for you must go wherever I send you and say whatever I tell you. And don’t be afraid of the people, for I will be with you and take care of you. I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, have spoken!” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Similar prophetic commissions including such dialogues are associated with the calls of Moses (Ex 3:1–4:17) and Gideon (Jgs 6:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>The second major form of prophetic commission is the “throne vision.” An outstanding example is Isaiah 6:1-8:<\/p>\n<p>In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord. He was sitting on a lofty throne, and the train of his robe filled the Temple. . . .<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Then I said, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man and a member of a sinful race. Yet I have seen the King, the <span>Lord<\/span> Almighty!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then one of the seraphim flew over to the altar, and he picked up a burning coal with a pair of tongs. He touched my lips with it and said, “See, this coal has touched your lips. Now your guilt is removed, and your sins are forgiven.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then I heard the Lord asking, “Whom should I send as a messenger to my people? Who will go for us?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>And I said, “Lord, I’ll go! Send me.” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Here we have an account of the visionary presence of a prophet in the heavenly council; in this case, however, the prophet participates in the deliberations and thereby receives a prophetic commission. Though few prophets have left accounts of their divine commissions, most of them appear to have been conscious of having been “sent” by God (Is 48:16; Hos 8:1; Am 7:14-15). According to Jeremiah, false prophets did not receive such divine commissions (Jer 23:21, 32; 28:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMessageoftheProphets\">The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The most common introductory formula for prophetic oracles in the OT is the phrase “Thus says the Lord,” which occurs hundreds of times in prophetic contexts. This formula clearly implies that the pronouncement so introduced is not the word of the prophet who utters the oracle but of the God of Israel who delivered his word to his prophet. The use of this formula also reiterates the prophet’s sense of divine commission. In oracles introduced in this manner, God speaks in the first person. In fact, virtually all Israelite prophetic utterance is formulated as the direct speech of the God of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets used many literary forms in which to express their oracles. Two of the more widely used forms of prophetic speech are the judgment speech and the oracle of salvation. The judgment speech is composed of at least two central elements: the speech of rebuke or invective, and the pronouncement of judgment (see 2 Kgs 1:3-4). The second common prophetic speech form is the oracle of salvation (see Is 41:8-13). Other fixed forms of prophetic speech include the prophecy of salvation (43:14-21), the proclamation of salvation (41:17-20; 42:14-17; 43:16-21; 49:7-12), and the woe oracle (Is 5:8-10; 10:1-4; Am 5:18-24; 6:1-7; Mi 2:1-5).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The common adage that OT prophets were not “foretellers” but “forthtellers” is not strictly correct. All of the prophets predict the future. Such prediction, however, is based not on human curiosity of what the future will hold but rather is rooted in the future consequences of past or present violations of the covenant, or on a future act of deliverance that will provide hope for a discouraged people. Most of the prophetic speeches that have been preserved in the OT were originally delivered as public proclamations or sermons. Most of these prophetic proclamations were evoked by the iniquity and apostasy of Israel. Hosea and Jeremiah condemned Israel because she had broken the covenant (Jer 11:2-3; Hos 8:1).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets are frequently associated with social justice and social reform, and these elements were unquestionably an important dimension of their message. Amos denounced the rich who afflicted the poor (Am 2:6-8; 4:1; 5:11; 8:4-6). He railed against sexual immorality (2:6-8) and against those who take bribes (5:12). Hosea provided a list of prevalent vices, including lying, killing, stealing, adultery, and idolatry (Hos 4:2). Idolatry was a particular target for his denunciations (8:5; 11:2). The background for such heated denunciations of Israel’s behavior is God’s unquenchable love for Israel (Is 43:4; Jer 31:3; Hos 3:1; 11:1-4; 14:4; Mal 1:2), which is inseparable from his election of Israel (Is 43:1; Jer 33:24; Ez 20:5; Hos 3).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets were concerned not only with the transgressions of Israel and the historical judgment that would inevitably follow but also with the achievement of a final future time of bliss. The message of many of the prophets is thoroughly eschatological (i.e., pertaining to the end times). One such eschatological concept is that of the Day of the Lord. The concept of the Day of the Lord first appears in Amos, where the emphasis lies on the disaster that will befall Israel on that day. Amos’s emphasis on disaster notwithstanding, the Day of the Lord is a conception that had both salvific as well as judgmental overtones for Israel. While the disaster that will occur in the Day of the Lord can be viewed in terms of a literal historical fulfillment in the tragic events of 722 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Samaria) and 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Judah), there are nevertheless features of these predictions that transcend historical fulfillment and reach toward eschatological fulfillment.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Israelite conception of “salvation” was largely temporal in its dimensions, it included such blessings as length of life, fruitfulness of the womb and field, peace and victory over one’s enemies, the abundance of water, and so on. In harmony with this conception of salvation, the future age is conceived in precisely those terms, as in Amos 9:13-15.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets pictured a time when David himself, or someone very much like him, would return and inaugurate a golden era reminiscent of the great Davidic and Solomonic period. The covenant of God with David was not a conditional covenant but rather one that was absolutely inviolable (2 Sm 7:4-17; Ps 89; Jer 33:19-22), and it was with this knowledge that the prophets could look forward confidently to a restoration of David’s throne (Jer 17:24-26; 23:5-6; 33:14-15).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheNewTestament\">Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to the few self-proclaimed prophets of the intertestamental period, early Christianity began with a flurry of prophetic activity that lasted well into the second century <span>AD<\/span>. Jesus, his disciples and followers, and the early Christians were convinced that the times in which they lived were times in which OT prophecy was being fulfilled (Mk 1:14-15; Acts 2:16-21; Rom 16:25-27; 1 Cor 10:11). Yet this era was not only one of fulfillment but also one of the renewal of the prophetic gift.<\/p>\n<h5>John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist is remembered in the NT primarily as the forerunner of Jesus whose coming was predicted by Malachi (Mal 4:5-6). Yet, in his own right, John proclaimed the imminent judgment of God with a flair of denunciation and rebuke reminiscent of the OT prophets. John’s costume, consisting of a hairy cloak and a leather girdle (Mk 1:6), was reminiscent of the typical garb of OT prophets (1 Kgs 19:19; 2 Kgs 1:8; 2:13-14; Zec 13:4). John was regarded as a prophet by people everywhere (Mt 14:5; 17:10-13; Mk 9:11-13; 11:32; Lk 1:76; 7:26). Luke reports, in a style similar to the OT prophetic narratives, that “the word of God came to John” (Lk 3:2). Two short prophetic speeches have been preserved in Matthew 3:7-10 (cf. Lk 3:7-9) and Mark 1:7-8 (cf. Mt 3:11-12; Lk 3:15-18). In the first speech, John denounced those of his generation who had transgressed the covenant law and exhorted them to change their manner of life. In the second speech, John predicted the coming of the Mighty One, Jesus (Mt 3:11; Mk 1:7; Lk 3:16; Jn 1:15, 27, 30; Acts 13:25). John’s style, however, was not precisely that of the OT prophets. His pronouncements were made on his own authority; never did he use formulas such as “thus says the Lord,” or present his prophetic utterances as if they were speeches made by God. Yet, in spite of these differences, John is appropriately regarded as the last representative of the OT prophetic tradition (Mt 11:13; Lk 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus of Nazareth<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was popularly regarded as a prophet (Mt 16:14; 21:10-11; Mk 6:14-15; 8:28; Lk 7:16, 39; 9:8, 19; Jn 6:14; 7:40, 52). This assessment was based as much on the mighty deeds Jesus performed as on his prophetic speeches and predictions. Though Jesus nowhere claimed prophetic status directly, that claim is implicit in Mark 6:4: “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown” (cf. Mt 13:57; Lk 4:24). It is implicit as well in Luke 13:33: “Yes, today, tomorrow, and the next day I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In Acts, Jesus is regarded as “the prophet like Moses” predicted in Deuteronomy 18:18 (Acts 3:22; 7:37). Matthew presents Jesus as the New Moses, but he does not particularly emphasize his prophetic role. John, however, like Luke, emphasizes Jesus’ role as the prophet (Jn 4:19; 6:14-15; 7:40).<\/p>\n<p>While the Gospels and Acts reflect the notion that Jesus was a prophet, they also emphasize the fact that he was much more than a prophet. Nevertheless, the notion of prophetism was sufficiently important in early Judaism that Jesus’ recognition as a prophet is very significant. There are 12 solid reasons for regarding Jesus as a prophet in the OT tradition: (1) The sovereign authority of Jesus’ teaching (Mk 1:27), a feature underlined by his use of the introductory formula “(Amen) I say to you,” which is reminiscent of the formula “thus says the Lord” used by the OT prophets. (2) The poetic character of many of Jesus’ sayings is unlike contemporary rabbinic teaching but is similar to the poetic rhetoric of the OT prophets. (3) Jesus experienced visions (Lk 10:18) like the ancient prophets. (4) Jesus, like the prophets, made many predictions (Mt 23:38; Mk 13:2; 14:58; Lk 13:35; etc.). (5) Like the OT prophets, Jesus performed symbolic acts (such as the cleansing of the temple, the entry into Jerusalem, and the Last Supper). (6) Jesus, like the prophets, when necessary, rejected the formal observance of religious ritual and emphasized the moral and spiritual dimensions of obedience to God. (7) Jesus announced the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God—an eschatological proclamation similar to those made by the prophets. (8) Like the OT prophets, Jesus functioned as a preacher of repentance. (9) Jesus, like many of the prophets, was conscious of a special calling of God (Mt 15:24; Mk 8:31; 9:37; 14:36; Lk 4:18-26). (10) Jesus, like the prophets, received divine revelation through intimate communion with God (Mt 11:27; Lk 10:22). (11) Like the prophets, Jesus represented God; to obey him was to obey God, to reject him was to reject God (Mk 9:37; cf. Ez 33:30-33). (12) Like the prophets, Jesus was conscious of a mission to all Israel (Mt 15:24; 19:28; Lk 22:30).<\/p>\n<p>Among the many prophetic predictions of Jesus are the following:<\/p>\n<p>1. Predictions of the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God (Mt 10:7-8, 23; 23:39; Mk 1:15; 9:1; 13:28-29)<\/p>\n<li>2. Predictions of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (Mt 23:37-39; 24:2; 26:61; 27:40; Mk 13:2; 14:58; 15:29; Lk 13:34-35; 21:6; Jn 2:19-21)<\/li>\n<li>3. Predictions of the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 10:23, 32-33; 12:40; 13:40-41; 16:27; 24:27, 37-39; Mk 8:38; 13:26-27; 14:62; Lk 9:26; 11:30; 12:8-9; 17:24, 26)<\/li>\n<li>4. Predictions of the end of the age. The longest prophetic section in the Gospels is the eschatological discourse of Jesus in Mark 13:1-32 (cf. Mt 24:1-36; Lk 21:5-33), in which a number of predictions concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age are woven into a lengthy discourse to the disciples.<\/li>\n<h5>Prophecy as a Gift for the Believers<\/h5>\n<p>The beginning of prophetic activity in early Christianity, according to Acts, coincided with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the earliest Christians on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-21). Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost indicates that the outpouring of the Spirit fulfilled Joel’s prophecy (Acts 2:4, 17-21; cf. Jl 2:28-32). Further, since the Spirit had been poured out upon all early Christians (that Spirit being a Spirit of prophecy), all are actual or potential prophets.<\/p>\n<p>According to 1 Corinthians 12:28 (see also Rom 12:6; Eph 4:11), God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, and third teachers. The names of several early Christian prophets have been preserved. These include Agabus (Acts 11:27-28; 21:10-11); Judas and Silas (15:32); Barnabas, Simeon Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen, and Paul (13:1); and the four virgin daughters of Philip the evangelist (21:8-9). John, the author of Revelation, was certainly a prophet (Rv 1:3; 22:9, 18), though he never directly assumed that title.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRoleoftheChristianProphet\">The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p>Christian prophets were leaders in early Christian communities (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11), who exercised their gift in church gatherings (Acts 13:1-3; 11:27-28; 1 Cor 12–14; Rv 1:10). Since the Spirit of God was particularly active in Christian worship, prophecy was a major means whereby God communicated with his people. Prophets, like apostles and teachers, did not hold offices in local communities like bishops, elders, and deacons. Rather, they were chosen, not by individual congregations, but by divine commission and so were honored and accepted in all local communities.<\/p>\n<p>Early Christian prophets were both itinerant and settled, though itinerant prophets seem to have been more prevalent in Syria-Palestine and Asia Minor than in the European churches.<\/p>\n<h5>The Function of Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>According to Paul, the central purpose of prophecy (as of all other spiritual gifts) is that of building up or edifying the church. According to 1 Corinthians 14:3, “one who prophesies is helping others grow in the Lord, encouraging and comforting them” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Again, in 1 Corinthians 14:4, Paul states that the “one who speaks a word of prophecy strengthens the entire church.” Paul discussed the subject of spiritual gifts, particularly tongues speaking and prophecy, because the Corinthians had placed an excessive emphasis on speaking in tongues. Paul did not object to speaking in tongues (1 Cor 14:18, 39), but he did point out that, since it was generally incomprehensible, the church could not be edified by it. Prophecy, which consisted of comprehensible speech inspired by the Spirit, contributed to the mutual edification, encouragement, and consolation of all present (1 Cor 14:20-25, 39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>We know only a little about the content of prophecies uttered in the first-century church. Prophetic utterance occasionally provided divine guidance in making important decisions in early Christianity. Through a prophetic utterance, Paul and Barnabas were selected for a particular mission (Acts 13:1-3; cf. 1 Tm 1:18; 4:14). Probably through prophetic utterance, Paul and Timothy were forbidden to preach the gospel in Asia (Acts 16:6), and they were similarly forbidden by the Spirit of Jesus to go into Bithynia (v 7). Perhaps the most frequent use of prophecy is the prediction of the future. Agabus predicted a universal famine (11:28) and the imminent arrest of Paul (21:11). Other prophets had also predicted his impending imprisonment (20:23). The prophecies contained in the Revelation of John are all oriented toward the future events that will gradually unfold in the last days. Yet the purpose of John’s elaborate prophecy is not to satisfy the curiosity of his audience but rather to comfort and encourage them in the midst of persecution.<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>Unlike the prophets of the OT, Christian prophets did not always present their message in the form of a direct speech from God or Jesus. There are few, if any, formal indicators of the presence of prophetic speech in early Christian literature. The book of Revelation is one notable exception.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dreams; Oracle; Promise; Prophet, Prophetess; Prophets, False; Visions.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PROPHECY<\/h3>\n<p>Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheOldTestament\">Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>One of the clearest and most significant statements on the nature of prophetic inspiration in the OT is found in Numbers 12:6-8: “The <span>Lord<\/span> said to them, ‘Now listen to me! Even with prophets, I the <span>Lord<\/span> communicate by visions and dreams. But that is not how I communicate with my servant Moses. He is entrusted with my entire house. I speak to him face to face, directly and not in riddles! He sees the <span>Lord<\/span> as he is’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Several important insights into the nature of prophetic inspiration are found in this passage: (1) The prophetic gift of Moses was unique in that he alone received revelations directly from God. (2) Ordinarily, prophetic revelation was received through the medium of a dream or a vision. (3) The meaning of prophetic revelation is not always completely clear; prophecy is sometimes ambiguous.<\/p>\n<p>Further insight into the nature of prophetic revelation is found in Deuteronomy 18:18: “I [God] will raise up for them a prophet like you [Moses] from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him” (<span>rsv<\/span>). While this passage is of interest because Jesus was identified as “the prophet like Moses” who came in fulfillment of this prediction (Acts 3:22; 7:37), the more immediate historical reference is to the succession of prophets that guided Israel from Joshua to Malachi. The phrase “I will put my words in his mouth” refers to the process of divine inspiration and is reminiscent of the common OT prophetic formula “the word of the Lord came to [such and such a prophet]” (for examples, see 1 Sm 15:10; 2 Sm 24:11; 1 Kgs 19:9; Jon 1:1; Hg 1:1; 2:1, 20; Zec 7:1, 8; 8:1). A true prophet is one who speaks (or repeats) all that God has told him.<\/p>\n<h5>Modes of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>Dreams were a commonly recognized mode of inspiration throughout the ancient world, though they were more highly regarded in Greece than in ancient Israel. Revelatory dreams in the Bible fall into two major categories: (1) dreams whose meaning is self-evident, and (2) symbolic dreams that usually require the expertise of an interpreter of dreams. Both types normally involve both visual and auditory elements. In those dreams whose meaning is self-evident, normally a supernatural being (God or an angel) appears to the dreamer and speaks to him or her in a straightforward manner.<\/p>\n<p>More frequently, revelatory dreams have symbolic elements that require interpretation. The two great dream interpreters of the OT are Joseph and Daniel; the latter is clearly a prophet. The two symbolic dreams that Joseph himself dreamed (Gn 37:5-11) had sufficiently self-evident meaning so that his brothers and father were able to interpret them immediately. More complex were the dreams of the butler and baker (40:1-19) and of Pharaoh (41:1-36), which Joseph was able to interpret with the help of God. Similarly, Daniel was enabled to interpret the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar (Dn 2:25-45; 4:4-27). The skill in interpreting such dreams was attributed by both Joseph and Daniel to God (Gn 40:8; 41:16, 25; Dn 2:27-30; cf. 4:9). While dreams are used almost interchangeably with visions in referring to modes of prophetic inspiration (Jl 2:28), dreams do not occupy a significant part in the prophetic revelations of any of the OT prophets, with the exception of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic modes of prophetic inspiration was the vision (Nm 12:6; 24:4, 16; Hos 12:10). The revelatory visions experienced by the prophets were not limited to visual phenomena alone but also included the auditory dimension as well. In Isaiah 1:1, the author describes his entire prophetic book as a “vision”: “These visions concerning Judah and Jerusalem came to Isaiah son of Amoz during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah—all kings of Judah” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Yet in the very next verse, Isaiah says, “Hear, O heavens! Listen, O earth! This is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says.” Again, in Amos 1:1, “The <em>words<\/em> of Amos, who was among the shepherds of Tekoa, which he <em>saw<\/em> concerning Israel” (<span>rsv<\/span>, emphasis added).<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>All prophecy, whether biblical or not, presupposes that the prophet either possessed or was possessed by a personal supernatural power. The external behavioral manifestations of this possession can exhibit great variety.<\/p>\n<p>The prophetic phenomenon generally designated “ecstatic” prophecy appears to have existed in Canaan prior to the arrival of the Hebrew tribes in the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. The first reference to ecstatic prophecy in Israel occurs in 1 Samuel 10:5-13 (11th century <span>BC<\/span>), and it persisted at least till the sixth century <span>BC<\/span> (Jer 29:26).<\/p>\n<p>The ecstatic prophet achieves a trancelike state by self-induced means. The most common devices used to achieve a state of ecstasy were musical instruments, such as the harp, tambourine, flute, and lyre (1 Sm 10:5). Among the prophets of Baal, self-flagellation was another means of inducing ecstasy (1 Kgs 18:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>This kind of prophetic ecstasy was usually practiced by groups of prophets (1 Sm 10:5), and such ecstasy was contagious. When Saul met a band of such prophets, the Spirit of God came upon him and he, too, began to prophesy (vv 10-13), a phenomenon that occurred repeatedly to various messengers sent by Saul on a later occasion (19:20-22). At that time Saul again prophesied, and his ecstatic behavior is described in 1 Samuel 19:24. When Elisha was asked to prophesy for King Jehoram of Israel, he first requested a minstrel. When the minstrel played, the power of the Lord came upon him (2 Kgs 3:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofOldTestamentProphets\">Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>There are two basic types of prophetic commission in the OT. One type is that of a narrative call by God to a particular individual whose objections to the call are gradually overcome in a dialogue between himself and God. The classic example of this type of prophetic commission is found in Jeremiah 1:4-8:<\/p>\n<p>The <span>Lord<\/span> gave me a message. He said, “I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb. Before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as my spokesman to the world.”<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>“O Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span>,” I said, “I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>“Don’t say that,” the <span>Lord<\/span> replied, “for you must go wherever I send you and say whatever I tell you. And don’t be afraid of the people, for I will be with you and take care of you. I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, have spoken!” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Similar prophetic commissions including such dialogues are associated with the calls of Moses (Ex 3:1–4:17) and Gideon (Jgs 6:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>The second major form of prophetic commission is the “throne vision.” An outstanding example is Isaiah 6:1-8:<\/p>\n<p>In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord. He was sitting on a lofty throne, and the train of his robe filled the Temple. . . .<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Then I said, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man and a member of a sinful race. Yet I have seen the King, the <span>Lord<\/span> Almighty!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then one of the seraphim flew over to the altar, and he picked up a burning coal with a pair of tongs. He touched my lips with it and said, “See, this coal has touched your lips. Now your guilt is removed, and your sins are forgiven.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then I heard the Lord asking, “Whom should I send as a messenger to my people? Who will go for us?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>And I said, “Lord, I’ll go! Send me.” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Here we have an account of the visionary presence of a prophet in the heavenly council; in this case, however, the prophet participates in the deliberations and thereby receives a prophetic commission. Though few prophets have left accounts of their divine commissions, most of them appear to have been conscious of having been “sent” by God (Is 48:16; Hos 8:1; Am 7:14-15). According to Jeremiah, false prophets did not receive such divine commissions (Jer 23:21, 32; 28:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMessageoftheProphets\">The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The most common introductory formula for prophetic oracles in the OT is the phrase “Thus says the Lord,” which occurs hundreds of times in prophetic contexts. This formula clearly implies that the pronouncement so introduced is not the word of the prophet who utters the oracle but of the God of Israel who delivered his word to his prophet. The use of this formula also reiterates the prophet’s sense of divine commission. In oracles introduced in this manner, God speaks in the first person. In fact, virtually all Israelite prophetic utterance is formulated as the direct speech of the God of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets used many literary forms in which to express their oracles. Two of the more widely used forms of prophetic speech are the judgment speech and the oracle of salvation. The judgment speech is composed of at least two central elements: the speech of rebuke or invective, and the pronouncement of judgment (see 2 Kgs 1:3-4). The second common prophetic speech form is the oracle of salvation (see Is 41:8-13). Other fixed forms of prophetic speech include the prophecy of salvation (43:14-21), the proclamation of salvation (41:17-20; 42:14-17; 43:16-21; 49:7-12), and the woe oracle (Is 5:8-10; 10:1-4; Am 5:18-24; 6:1-7; Mi 2:1-5).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The common adage that OT prophets were not “foretellers” but “forthtellers” is not strictly correct. All of the prophets predict the future. Such prediction, however, is based not on human curiosity of what the future will hold but rather is rooted in the future consequences of past or present violations of the covenant, or on a future act of deliverance that will provide hope for a discouraged people. Most of the prophetic speeches that have been preserved in the OT were originally delivered as public proclamations or sermons. Most of these prophetic proclamations were evoked by the iniquity and apostasy of Israel. Hosea and Jeremiah condemned Israel because she had broken the covenant (Jer 11:2-3; Hos 8:1).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets are frequently associated with social justice and social reform, and these elements were unquestionably an important dimension of their message. Amos denounced the rich who afflicted the poor (Am 2:6-8; 4:1; 5:11; 8:4-6). He railed against sexual immorality (2:6-8) and against those who take bribes (5:12). Hosea provided a list of prevalent vices, including lying, killing, stealing, adultery, and idolatry (Hos 4:2). Idolatry was a particular target for his denunciations (8:5; 11:2). The background for such heated denunciations of Israel’s behavior is God’s unquenchable love for Israel (Is 43:4; Jer 31:3; Hos 3:1; 11:1-4; 14:4; Mal 1:2), which is inseparable from his election of Israel (Is 43:1; Jer 33:24; Ez 20:5; Hos 3).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets were concerned not only with the transgressions of Israel and the historical judgment that would inevitably follow but also with the achievement of a final future time of bliss. The message of many of the prophets is thoroughly eschatological (i.e., pertaining to the end times). One such eschatological concept is that of the Day of the Lord. The concept of the Day of the Lord first appears in Amos, where the emphasis lies on the disaster that will befall Israel on that day. Amos’s emphasis on disaster notwithstanding, the Day of the Lord is a conception that had both salvific as well as judgmental overtones for Israel. While the disaster that will occur in the Day of the Lord can be viewed in terms of a literal historical fulfillment in the tragic events of 722 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Samaria) and 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Judah), there are nevertheless features of these predictions that transcend historical fulfillment and reach toward eschatological fulfillment.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Israelite conception of “salvation” was largely temporal in its dimensions, it included such blessings as length of life, fruitfulness of the womb and field, peace and victory over one’s enemies, the abundance of water, and so on. In harmony with this conception of salvation, the future age is conceived in precisely those terms, as in Amos 9:13-15.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets pictured a time when David himself, or someone very much like him, would return and inaugurate a golden era reminiscent of the great Davidic and Solomonic period. The covenant of God with David was not a conditional covenant but rather one that was absolutely inviolable (2 Sm 7:4-17; Ps 89; Jer 33:19-22), and it was with this knowledge that the prophets could look forward confidently to a restoration of David’s throne (Jer 17:24-26; 23:5-6; 33:14-15).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheNewTestament\">Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to the few self-proclaimed prophets of the intertestamental period, early Christianity began with a flurry of prophetic activity that lasted well into the second century <span>AD<\/span>. Jesus, his disciples and followers, and the early Christians were convinced that the times in which they lived were times in which OT prophecy was being fulfilled (Mk 1:14-15; Acts 2:16-21; Rom 16:25-27; 1 Cor 10:11). Yet this era was not only one of fulfillment but also one of the renewal of the prophetic gift.<\/p>\n<h5>John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist is remembered in the NT primarily as the forerunner of Jesus whose coming was predicted by Malachi (Mal 4:5-6). Yet, in his own right, John proclaimed the imminent judgment of God with a flair of denunciation and rebuke reminiscent of the OT prophets. John’s costume, consisting of a hairy cloak and a leather girdle (Mk 1:6), was reminiscent of the typical garb of OT prophets (1 Kgs 19:19; 2 Kgs 1:8; 2:13-14; Zec 13:4). John was regarded as a prophet by people everywhere (Mt 14:5; 17:10-13; Mk 9:11-13; 11:32; Lk 1:76; 7:26). Luke reports, in a style similar to the OT prophetic narratives, that “the word of God came to John” (Lk 3:2). Two short prophetic speeches have been preserved in Matthew 3:7-10 (cf. Lk 3:7-9) and Mark 1:7-8 (cf. Mt 3:11-12; Lk 3:15-18). In the first speech, John denounced those of his generation who had transgressed the covenant law and exhorted them to change their manner of life. In the second speech, John predicted the coming of the Mighty One, Jesus (Mt 3:11; Mk 1:7; Lk 3:16; Jn 1:15, 27, 30; Acts 13:25). John’s style, however, was not precisely that of the OT prophets. His pronouncements were made on his own authority; never did he use formulas such as “thus says the Lord,” or present his prophetic utterances as if they were speeches made by God. Yet, in spite of these differences, John is appropriately regarded as the last representative of the OT prophetic tradition (Mt 11:13; Lk 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus of Nazareth<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was popularly regarded as a prophet (Mt 16:14; 21:10-11; Mk 6:14-15; 8:28; Lk 7:16, 39; 9:8, 19; Jn 6:14; 7:40, 52). This assessment was based as much on the mighty deeds Jesus performed as on his prophetic speeches and predictions. Though Jesus nowhere claimed prophetic status directly, that claim is implicit in Mark 6:4: “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown” (cf. Mt 13:57; Lk 4:24). It is implicit as well in Luke 13:33: “Yes, today, tomorrow, and the next day I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In Acts, Jesus is regarded as “the prophet like Moses” predicted in Deuteronomy 18:18 (Acts 3:22; 7:37). Matthew presents Jesus as the New Moses, but he does not particularly emphasize his prophetic role. John, however, like Luke, emphasizes Jesus’ role as the prophet (Jn 4:19; 6:14-15; 7:40).<\/p>\n<p>While the Gospels and Acts reflect the notion that Jesus was a prophet, they also emphasize the fact that he was much more than a prophet. Nevertheless, the notion of prophetism was sufficiently important in early Judaism that Jesus’ recognition as a prophet is very significant. There are 12 solid reasons for regarding Jesus as a prophet in the OT tradition: (1) The sovereign authority of Jesus’ teaching (Mk 1:27), a feature underlined by his use of the introductory formula “(Amen) I say to you,” which is reminiscent of the formula “thus says the Lord” used by the OT prophets. (2) The poetic character of many of Jesus’ sayings is unlike contemporary rabbinic teaching but is similar to the poetic rhetoric of the OT prophets. (3) Jesus experienced visions (Lk 10:18) like the ancient prophets. (4) Jesus, like the prophets, made many predictions (Mt 23:38; Mk 13:2; 14:58; Lk 13:35; etc.). (5) Like the OT prophets, Jesus performed symbolic acts (such as the cleansing of the temple, the entry into Jerusalem, and the Last Supper). (6) Jesus, like the prophets, when necessary, rejected the formal observance of religious ritual and emphasized the moral and spiritual dimensions of obedience to God. (7) Jesus announced the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God—an eschatological proclamation similar to those made by the prophets. (8) Like the OT prophets, Jesus functioned as a preacher of repentance. (9) Jesus, like many of the prophets, was conscious of a special calling of God (Mt 15:24; Mk 8:31; 9:37; 14:36; Lk 4:18-26). (10) Jesus, like the prophets, received divine revelation through intimate communion with God (Mt 11:27; Lk 10:22). (11) Like the prophets, Jesus represented God; to obey him was to obey God, to reject him was to reject God (Mk 9:37; cf. Ez 33:30-33). (12) Like the prophets, Jesus was conscious of a mission to all Israel (Mt 15:24; 19:28; Lk 22:30).<\/p>\n<p>Among the many prophetic predictions of Jesus are the following:<\/p>\n<p>1. Predictions of the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God (Mt 10:7-8, 23; 23:39; Mk 1:15; 9:1; 13:28-29)<\/p>\n<li>2. Predictions of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (Mt 23:37-39; 24:2; 26:61; 27:40; Mk 13:2; 14:58; 15:29; Lk 13:34-35; 21:6; Jn 2:19-21)<\/li>\n<li>3. Predictions of the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 10:23, 32-33; 12:40; 13:40-41; 16:27; 24:27, 37-39; Mk 8:38; 13:26-27; 14:62; Lk 9:26; 11:30; 12:8-9; 17:24, 26)<\/li>\n<li>4. Predictions of the end of the age. The longest prophetic section in the Gospels is the eschatological discourse of Jesus in Mark 13:1-32 (cf. Mt 24:1-36; Lk 21:5-33), in which a number of predictions concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age are woven into a lengthy discourse to the disciples.<\/li>\n<h5>Prophecy as a Gift for the Believers<\/h5>\n<p>The beginning of prophetic activity in early Christianity, according to Acts, coincided with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the earliest Christians on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-21). Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost indicates that the outpouring of the Spirit fulfilled Joel’s prophecy (Acts 2:4, 17-21; cf. Jl 2:28-32). Further, since the Spirit had been poured out upon all early Christians (that Spirit being a Spirit of prophecy), all are actual or potential prophets.<\/p>\n<p>According to 1 Corinthians 12:28 (see also Rom 12:6; Eph 4:11), God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, and third teachers. The names of several early Christian prophets have been preserved. These include Agabus (Acts 11:27-28; 21:10-11); Judas and Silas (15:32); Barnabas, Simeon Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen, and Paul (13:1); and the four virgin daughters of Philip the evangelist (21:8-9). John, the author of Revelation, was certainly a prophet (Rv 1:3; 22:9, 18), though he never directly assumed that title.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRoleoftheChristianProphet\">The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p>Christian prophets were leaders in early Christian communities (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11), who exercised their gift in church gatherings (Acts 13:1-3; 11:27-28; 1 Cor 12–14; Rv 1:10). Since the Spirit of God was particularly active in Christian worship, prophecy was a major means whereby God communicated with his people. Prophets, like apostles and teachers, did not hold offices in local communities like bishops, elders, and deacons. Rather, they were chosen, not by individual congregations, but by divine commission and so were honored and accepted in all local communities.<\/p>\n<p>Early Christian prophets were both itinerant and settled, though itinerant prophets seem to have been more prevalent in Syria-Palestine and Asia Minor than in the European churches.<\/p>\n<h5>The Function of Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>According to Paul, the central purpose of prophecy (as of all other spiritual gifts) is that of building up or edifying the church. According to 1 Corinthians 14:3, “one who prophesies is helping others grow in the Lord, encouraging and comforting them” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Again, in 1 Corinthians 14:4, Paul states that the “one who speaks a word of prophecy strengthens the entire church.” Paul discussed the subject of spiritual gifts, particularly tongues speaking and prophecy, because the Corinthians had placed an excessive emphasis on speaking in tongues. Paul did not object to speaking in tongues (1 Cor 14:18, 39), but he did point out that, since it was generally incomprehensible, the church could not be edified by it. Prophecy, which consisted of comprehensible speech inspired by the Spirit, contributed to the mutual edification, encouragement, and consolation of all present (1 Cor 14:20-25, 39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>We know only a little about the content of prophecies uttered in the first-century church. Prophetic utterance occasionally provided divine guidance in making important decisions in early Christianity. Through a prophetic utterance, Paul and Barnabas were selected for a particular mission (Acts 13:1-3; cf. 1 Tm 1:18; 4:14). Probably through prophetic utterance, Paul and Timothy were forbidden to preach the gospel in Asia (Acts 16:6), and they were similarly forbidden by the Spirit of Jesus to go into Bithynia (v 7). Perhaps the most frequent use of prophecy is the prediction of the future. Agabus predicted a universal famine (11:28) and the imminent arrest of Paul (21:11). Other prophets had also predicted his impending imprisonment (20:23). The prophecies contained in the Revelation of John are all oriented toward the future events that will gradually unfold in the last days. Yet the purpose of John’s elaborate prophecy is not to satisfy the curiosity of his audience but rather to comfort and encourage them in the midst of persecution.<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>Unlike the prophets of the OT, Christian prophets did not always present their message in the form of a direct speech from God or Jesus. There are few, if any, formal indicators of the presence of prophetic speech in early Christian literature. The book of Revelation is one notable exception.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dreams; Oracle; Promise; Prophet, Prophetess; Prophets, False; Visions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PROPHECY Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration. Preview • Prophecy in the Old Testament • Types of Old Testament Prophets • The Message of the Prophets • Prophecy in the ...","summary_en":"PROPHECY Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration. Preview • Prophecy in the Old Testament • Types of Old Testament Prophets • The Message of the Prophets • Prophecy in the ...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38671,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"World","title_en":"World","content_ro":"<h3>WORLD<\/h3>\n<p>An important NT term from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> (meaning that which is ordered or arranged), having five different meanings:<\/p>\n<p>1. The universe created by God with design and order (e.g., Mt 13:35; Jn 17:24; Acts 17:24).<\/p>\n<li>2. The planet earth (e.g., Jn 11:9). This includes the idea of earth as the dwelling place of human beings (16:21) and of earth as contrasted with heaven (6:14; 12:46).<\/li>\n<li>3. The total of humanity (Mt 5:14; Jn 3:16; 1 Cor 4:13).<\/li>\n<li>4. The total of human existence in this present life, with all of its experience and possessions (Mt 16:26; 1 Cor 7:33).<\/li>\n<li>5. The world order as alienated from God, in rebellion against him, and condemned for its godlessness. It is “this world” (Jn 8:23; 12:25; 1 Cor 3:19), as opposed to “that which is to come.” The ruler of this world is the devil (Jn 12:31; 14:30; 16:11; 1 Cor 5:10)—as John said it, “The whole world is under the control of the evil one” (1 Jn 5:19, <span>niv<\/span>). Christians are not of this world (Jn 15:19; 17:16), even though they live in the world and participate in its activities (17:11). The believer is regarded as dead to the world (Gal 6:14; cf. Col 3:2-3). The Christian is to be separated from the world (Jas 1:27).<\/li>\n<p>One’s relationship with the world is an indicator of one’s relationship with God. Those who love the world are void of love for God the Father (1 Jn 2:15). The Scripture points out that “all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life, is not of the Father but is of the world” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). The world and its desires or lusts are transient, passing away, but the doer of God’s word abides forever (1 Jn 2:17; cf. 2 Cor 4:18). Friendship with the world is enmity toward God (Jas 4:4).<\/p>\n<p>The discourse of Jesus on the night before his crucifixion contains much teaching about the world. The world cannot receive the Spirit of truth (Jn 14:17). Christ gives a peace that the world cannot give (v 27). Jesus offers love, while the world gives hatred and persecution (15:19-20). The world’s hatred of God is also directed against the followers of Christ (vv 18-21). Although the disciples of Jesus have tribulation “in this world,” they are to be of good cheer, for Jesus has overcome the world (16:33).<\/p>\n<p>Another Greek word sometimes translated “world” is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">aion<\/span><em>,<\/em> which emphasizes the temporal aspect of the world. It is used of time without end, eternity (e.g., Rom 1:25; 2 Cor 11:31; Phil 4:20). <em>See<\/em> Age.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WORLD<\/h3>\n<p>An important NT term from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> (meaning that which is ordered or arranged), having five different meanings:<\/p>\n<p>1. The universe created by God with design and order (e.g., Mt 13:35; Jn 17:24; Acts 17:24).<\/p>\n<li>2. The planet earth (e.g., Jn 11:9). This includes the idea of earth as the dwelling place of human beings (16:21) and of earth as contrasted with heaven (6:14; 12:46).<\/li>\n<li>3. The total of humanity (Mt 5:14; Jn 3:16; 1 Cor 4:13).<\/li>\n<li>4. The total of human existence in this present life, with all of its experience and possessions (Mt 16:26; 1 Cor 7:33).<\/li>\n<li>5. The world order as alienated from God, in rebellion against him, and condemned for its godlessness. It is “this world” (Jn 8:23; 12:25; 1 Cor 3:19), as opposed to “that which is to come.” The ruler of this world is the devil (Jn 12:31; 14:30; 16:11; 1 Cor 5:10)—as John said it, “The whole world is under the control of the evil one” (1 Jn 5:19, <span>niv<\/span>). Christians are not of this world (Jn 15:19; 17:16), even though they live in the world and participate in its activities (17:11). The believer is regarded as dead to the world (Gal 6:14; cf. Col 3:2-3). The Christian is to be separated from the world (Jas 1:27).<\/li>\n<p>One’s relationship with the world is an indicator of one’s relationship with God. Those who love the world are void of love for God the Father (1 Jn 2:15). The Scripture points out that “all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life, is not of the Father but is of the world” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). The world and its desires or lusts are transient, passing away, but the doer of God’s word abides forever (1 Jn 2:17; cf. 2 Cor 4:18). Friendship with the world is enmity toward God (Jas 4:4).<\/p>\n<p>The discourse of Jesus on the night before his crucifixion contains much teaching about the world. The world cannot receive the Spirit of truth (Jn 14:17). Christ gives a peace that the world cannot give (v 27). Jesus offers love, while the world gives hatred and persecution (15:19-20). The world’s hatred of God is also directed against the followers of Christ (vv 18-21). Although the disciples of Jesus have tribulation “in this world,” they are to be of good cheer, for Jesus has overcome the world (16:33).<\/p>\n<p>Another Greek word sometimes translated “world” is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">aion<\/span><em>,<\/em> which emphasizes the temporal aspect of the world. It is used of time without end, eternity (e.g., Rom 1:25; 2 Cor 11:31; Phil 4:20). <em>See<\/em> Age.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WORLD An important NT term from the Greek word kosmos (meaning that which is ordered or arranged), having five different meanings: 1. The universe created by God with design and order (e.g., Mt 13:35; Jn 17:24; Acts 17:24). 2. The planet earth (e.g., Jn 11:9). This includes the idea of earth as the dwelling place of human beings (16:21) and of earth as contrasted with heaven (6:14; 12:46). 3. The total of humanity (Mt 5:14; Jn 3:16; 1 Cor 4:13). 4. The total of human existence in this present...","summary_en":"WORLD An important NT term from the Greek word kosmos (meaning that which is ordered or arranged), having five different meanings: 1. The universe created by God with design and order (e.g., Mt 13:35; Jn 17:24; Acts 17:24). 2. The planet earth (e.g., Jn 11:9). This includes the idea of earth as the dwelling place of human beings (16:21) and of earth as contrasted with heaven (6:14; 12:46). 3. The total of humanity (Mt 5:14; Jn 3:16; 1 Cor 4:13). 4. The total of human existence in this present...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":40363,"type":"textbox","type_label":"Notă explicativă","type_icon":"💡","type_color":"#8b5cf6","title_ro":"Three Anointed Ones Foreshadow the Messiah","title_en":"Three Anointed Ones Foreshadow the Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>Three Anointed Ones Foreshadow the Messiah<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>Jesus’ office and function were foreshadowed by the three groups of OT anointed officials: prophets, priests, and kings. Elisha’s anointing by Elijah (1 Kgs 19:16) shows anointing of prophets was practiced, although not required by OT law. Moses was the first OT prophet (Dt 18:18) whose ministry prompted the messianic hope for the coming of the Prophet (Jn 6:14; Heb 1:1). All priests, from Aaron on, were ordained by anointing with oil in required consecration rites (Ex 28:41; 29:7-9; 30:30). The kings of Israel, beginning with Saul and David, were anointed as a sign of divine choice and approval (1 Sm 9:15-17; 10:1; 16:13). Essential to the external ceremony was the pouring of perfumed olive oil upon the person’s head (Ex 30:22-33). The internal reality was the gift of the Spirit to the recipient: “from that day on the Spirit of the <span>Lord<\/span> came upon David in power” (1 Sm 16:13, <span>niv<\/span>). The anointed person was not a free agent. As prophet, priest, or king, he spoke, served, or ruled in the name of the Lord and as his representative to the people of God.<\/p><\/blockquote>","content_en":"<h3>Three Anointed Ones Foreshadow the Messiah<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>Jesus’ office and function were foreshadowed by the three groups of OT anointed officials: prophets, priests, and kings. Elisha’s anointing by Elijah (1 Kgs 19:16) shows anointing of prophets was practiced, although not required by OT law. Moses was the first OT prophet (Dt 18:18) whose ministry prompted the messianic hope for the coming of the Prophet (Jn 6:14; Heb 1:1). All priests, from Aaron on, were ordained by anointing with oil in required consecration rites (Ex 28:41; 29:7-9; 30:30). The kings of Israel, beginning with Saul and David, were anointed as a sign of divine choice and approval (1 Sm 9:15-17; 10:1; 16:13). Essential to the external ceremony was the pouring of perfumed olive oil upon the person’s head (Ex 30:22-33). The internal reality was the gift of the Spirit to the recipient: “from that day on the Spirit of the <span>Lord<\/span> came upon David in power” (1 Sm 16:13, <span>niv<\/span>). The anointed person was not a free agent. As prophet, priest, or king, he spoke, served, or ruled in the name of the Lord and as his representative to the people of God.<\/p><\/blockquote>","summary_ro":"Three Anointed Ones Foreshadow the Messiah Jesus’ office and function were foreshadowed by the three groups of OT anointed officials: prophets, priests, and kings. Elisha’s anointing by Elijah (1 Kgs 19:16) shows anointing of prophets was practiced, although not required by OT law. Moses was the first OT prophet (Dt 18:18) whose ministry prompted the messianic hope for the coming of the Prophet (Jn 6:14; Heb 1:1). All priests, from Aaron on, were ordained by anointing with oil in required con...","summary_en":"Three Anointed Ones Foreshadow the Messiah Jesus’ office and function were foreshadowed by the three groups of OT anointed officials: prophets, priests, and kings. Elisha’s anointing by Elijah (1 Kgs 19:16) shows anointing of prophets was practiced, although not required by OT law. Moses was the first OT prophet (Dt 18:18) whose ministry prompted the messianic hope for the coming of the Prophet (Jn 6:14; Heb 1:1). All priests, from Aaron on, were ordained by anointing with oil in required con...","source":"Textboxes\/Textboxes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56431,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:14","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:14<\/strong> <em>he is the Prophet we have been expecting!<\/em> The crowd understood the miracle as a fulfillment of Old Testament promises (see Deut 18:15, 18; Mal 4:5-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:14<\/strong> <em>he is the Prophet we have been expecting!<\/em> The crowd understood the miracle as a fulfillment of Old Testament promises (see Deut 18:15, 18; Mal 4:5-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:14 he is the Prophet we have been expecting! The crowd understood the miracle as a fulfillment of Old Testament promises (see Deut 18:15, 18; Mal 4:5-6).","summary_en":"6:14 he is the Prophet we have been expecting! The crowd understood the miracle as a fulfillment of Old Testament promises (see Deut 18:15, 18; Mal 4:5-6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84057,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:14","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:14<\/strong> <em>he is the Prophet we have been expecting!<\/em> The crowd understood the miracle as a fulfillment of Old Testament promises (see Deut 18:15, 18; Mal 4:5-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:14<\/strong> <em>he is the Prophet we have been expecting!<\/em> The crowd understood the miracle as a fulfillment of Old Testament promises (see Deut 18:15, 18; Mal 4:5-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:14 he is the Prophet we have been expecting! The crowd understood the miracle as a fulfillment of Old Testament promises (see Deut 18:15, 18; Mal 4:5-6).","summary_en":"6:14 he is the Prophet we have been expecting! The crowd understood the miracle as a fulfillment of Old Testament promises (see Deut 18:15, 18; Mal 4:5-6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111683,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:14","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:14<\/strong> <em>he is the Prophet we have been expecting!<\/em> The crowd understood the miracle as a fulfillment of Old Testament promises (see Deut 18:15, 18; Mal 4:5-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:14<\/strong> <em>he is the Prophet we have been expecting!<\/em> The crowd understood the miracle as a fulfillment of Old Testament promises (see Deut 18:15, 18; Mal 4:5-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:14 he is the Prophet we have been expecting! The crowd understood the miracle as a fulfillment of Old Testament promises (see Deut 18:15, 18; Mal 4:5-6).","summary_en":"6:14 he is the Prophet we have been expecting! The crowd understood the miracle as a fulfillment of Old Testament promises (see Deut 18:15, 18; Mal 4:5-6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139309,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:14","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:14","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:14<\/strong> <em>he is the Prophet we have been expecting!<\/em> The crowd understood the miracle as a fulfillment of Old Testament promises (see Deut 18:15, 18; Mal 4:5-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:14<\/strong> <em>he is the Prophet we have been expecting!<\/em> The crowd understood the miracle as a fulfillment of Old Testament promises (see Deut 18:15, 18; Mal 4:5-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:14 he is the Prophet we have been expecting! The crowd understood the miracle as a fulfillment of Old Testament promises (see Deut 18:15, 18; Mal 4:5-6).","summary_en":"6:14 he is the Prophet we have been expecting! The crowd understood the miracle as a fulfillment of Old Testament promises (see Deut 18:15, 18; Mal 4:5-6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65841,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93467,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121093,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148719,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":56432,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:15","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:15","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:15<\/strong> The people <em>were ready to force<\/em> Jesus to become <em>their king<\/em>. To avoid this role, Jesus fled the crowd and commanded his disciples to go back across the lake (Mark 6:45-46).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:15<\/strong> The people <em>were ready to force<\/em> Jesus to become <em>their king<\/em>. To avoid this role, Jesus fled the crowd and commanded his disciples to go back across the lake (Mark 6:45-46).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:15 The people were ready to force Jesus to become their king. To avoid this role, Jesus fled the crowd and commanded his disciples to go back across the lake (Mark 6:45-46).","summary_en":"6:15 The people were ready to force Jesus to become their king. To avoid this role, Jesus fled the crowd and commanded his disciples to go back across the lake (Mark 6:45-46).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84058,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:15","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:15","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:15<\/strong> The people <em>were ready to force<\/em> Jesus to become <em>their king<\/em>. To avoid this role, Jesus fled the crowd and commanded his disciples to go back across the lake (Mark 6:45-46).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:15<\/strong> The people <em>were ready to force<\/em> Jesus to become <em>their king<\/em>. To avoid this role, Jesus fled the crowd and commanded his disciples to go back across the lake (Mark 6:45-46).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:15 The people were ready to force Jesus to become their king. To avoid this role, Jesus fled the crowd and commanded his disciples to go back across the lake (Mark 6:45-46).","summary_en":"6:15 The people were ready to force Jesus to become their king. To avoid this role, Jesus fled the crowd and commanded his disciples to go back across the lake (Mark 6:45-46).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111684,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:15","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:15","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:15<\/strong> The people <em>were ready to force<\/em> Jesus to become <em>their king<\/em>. To avoid this role, Jesus fled the crowd and commanded his disciples to go back across the lake (Mark 6:45-46).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:15<\/strong> The people <em>were ready to force<\/em> Jesus to become <em>their king<\/em>. To avoid this role, Jesus fled the crowd and commanded his disciples to go back across the lake (Mark 6:45-46).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:15 The people were ready to force Jesus to become their king. To avoid this role, Jesus fled the crowd and commanded his disciples to go back across the lake (Mark 6:45-46).","summary_en":"6:15 The people were ready to force Jesus to become their king. To avoid this role, Jesus fled the crowd and commanded his disciples to go back across the lake (Mark 6:45-46).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139310,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:15","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:15","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:15<\/strong> The people <em>were ready to force<\/em> Jesus to become <em>their king<\/em>. To avoid this role, Jesus fled the crowd and commanded his disciples to go back across the lake (Mark 6:45-46).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:15<\/strong> The people <em>were ready to force<\/em> Jesus to become <em>their king<\/em>. To avoid this role, Jesus fled the crowd and commanded his disciples to go back across the lake (Mark 6:45-46).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:15 The people were ready to force Jesus to become their king. To avoid this role, Jesus fled the crowd and commanded his disciples to go back across the lake (Mark 6:45-46).","summary_en":"6:15 The people were ready to force Jesus to become their king. To avoid this role, Jesus fled the crowd and commanded his disciples to go back across the lake (Mark 6:45-46).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":20213,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of John","title_en":"Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","summary_en":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34210,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sea of Galilee","title_en":"Sea of Galilee","content_ro":"<h3>SEA OF GALILEE<\/h3>\n<p>A large body of water in Palestine. It has had many names in its history. In the OT the Sea of Galilee was known as the Sea of Chinnereth or Kinnereth (Nm 34:11), named for the town (Jos 19:35), or as Chinneroth (12:3). Later, the name was changed to Lake of Gennesaret because the city of Gennesaret was located on the site of Chinnereth or Tell Ureime (Lk 5:1; 1 Macc 11:67). The most familiar name—the Sea of Galilee—was due to its connection with the province of Galilee to the west (Mt 4:18). It derived the name Sea of Tiberias (Jn 6:1, 23; 21:1) from the town of Tiberias on its southwestern shore. About <span>AD<\/span> 26 Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great, built the town near the warm springs of Hamath by the sea and named it for the emperor. In the Gospels “the sea” usually identifies the Sea of Galilee. Its modern Hebrew name is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yam Kinneret<\/span><em>.<\/em><\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Location\">Location<\/p>\n<p>The sea lies in the lower section of the Jordan Valley about 60 miles (96.5 kilometers) north of Jerusalem, located in a range of mountains. The mountains of Upper Galilee are northwest of the lake and rise to a height of 4,000 feet (1,219.2 meters) above sea level, while the mountains on the east and west ascend about 2,000 feet (609.6 meters). On the west, south, and east is the Decapolis.<\/p>\n<p>At the northwest corner of the lake the mountain wall flattens into the rich plain of Gennesaret, and on the east at 2,000 feet (609.6 meters) above sea level it gives way to the fertile El Batila in the northeast, where the Jordan enters the sea. At the time of the NT the Sea of Galilee was surrounded by the towns of Capernaum, Bethsaida, Korazin, Magdala, Tiberias, and others.<\/p>\n<p>The sea is an integral part of the Jordan River, which feeds it with water from the snowcapped Mt Hermon (towering over 9,000 feet, or 2,743.2 meters, above sea level) and the Lebanon mountains. In its 65-mile (104.6-kilometer) course from the Sea of Galilee to the Dead Sea, the Jordan River drops 590 feet (179.8 meters), an average of about nine feet per mile.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Description\">Description<\/p>\n<p>The lake is approximately 13 miles or 20.9 kilometers long and 6 miles or 9.7 kilometers wide (7½ miles or 12.1 kilometers at its broadest point opposite Magdala). It lies almost 700 feet (213.4 meters) below the Mediterranean Sea, and its greatest depth is 200 feet (60.9 meters). Its shape resembles a harp, and some scholars think the name Chinnereth comes from a Hebrew word meaning “harp.” The climate is semitropical. Because of this climate, combined with the sulphur springs at Tiberias, it became a resort to which sick people traveled. The lake abounds in fish, so fishing became an important industry (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:9-11). Sudden and violent storms (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25), caused by the collision of warm and cold air, occur regularly.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Importance\">Importance<\/p>\n<p>Most of the events of Jesus’ life took place in Galilee, especially around Gennesaret, the most densely populated area of Palestine. He is said to have lived at Capernaum (Mt 4:13), and he did many miracles there (11:23). Because the area on the west of the lake was a health resort, Jesus found many infirm people there and healed them (Mk 1:32-34; 6:53-56). Other important occurrences in relation to the sea were the Sermon on the Mount, traditionally near Capernaum (Mt 5:1ff.; cf. 8:1, 5); the drowning of the swine in the region of the Gadarenes (8:28-34); the curse on Korazin (11:21); the calming of the sea (8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-24); and Jesus’ walking on the water (Mt 14:22-23; Mk 6:45-51; Jn 6:16-21).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Galilee; Palestine.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SEA OF GALILEE<\/h3>\n<p>A large body of water in Palestine. It has had many names in its history. In the OT the Sea of Galilee was known as the Sea of Chinnereth or Kinnereth (Nm 34:11), named for the town (Jos 19:35), or as Chinneroth (12:3). Later, the name was changed to Lake of Gennesaret because the city of Gennesaret was located on the site of Chinnereth or Tell Ureime (Lk 5:1; 1 Macc 11:67). The most familiar name—the Sea of Galilee—was due to its connection with the province of Galilee to the west (Mt 4:18). It derived the name Sea of Tiberias (Jn 6:1, 23; 21:1) from the town of Tiberias on its southwestern shore. About <span>AD<\/span> 26 Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great, built the town near the warm springs of Hamath by the sea and named it for the emperor. In the Gospels “the sea” usually identifies the Sea of Galilee. Its modern Hebrew name is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Yam Kinneret<\/span><em>.<\/em><\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Location\">Location<\/p>\n<p>The sea lies in the lower section of the Jordan Valley about 60 miles (96.5 kilometers) north of Jerusalem, located in a range of mountains. The mountains of Upper Galilee are northwest of the lake and rise to a height of 4,000 feet (1,219.2 meters) above sea level, while the mountains on the east and west ascend about 2,000 feet (609.6 meters). On the west, south, and east is the Decapolis.<\/p>\n<p>At the northwest corner of the lake the mountain wall flattens into the rich plain of Gennesaret, and on the east at 2,000 feet (609.6 meters) above sea level it gives way to the fertile El Batila in the northeast, where the Jordan enters the sea. At the time of the NT the Sea of Galilee was surrounded by the towns of Capernaum, Bethsaida, Korazin, Magdala, Tiberias, and others.<\/p>\n<p>The sea is an integral part of the Jordan River, which feeds it with water from the snowcapped Mt Hermon (towering over 9,000 feet, or 2,743.2 meters, above sea level) and the Lebanon mountains. In its 65-mile (104.6-kilometer) course from the Sea of Galilee to the Dead Sea, the Jordan River drops 590 feet (179.8 meters), an average of about nine feet per mile.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Description\">Description<\/p>\n<p>The lake is approximately 13 miles or 20.9 kilometers long and 6 miles or 9.7 kilometers wide (7½ miles or 12.1 kilometers at its broadest point opposite Magdala). It lies almost 700 feet (213.4 meters) below the Mediterranean Sea, and its greatest depth is 200 feet (60.9 meters). Its shape resembles a harp, and some scholars think the name Chinnereth comes from a Hebrew word meaning “harp.” The climate is semitropical. Because of this climate, combined with the sulphur springs at Tiberias, it became a resort to which sick people traveled. The lake abounds in fish, so fishing became an important industry (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:9-11). Sudden and violent storms (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25), caused by the collision of warm and cold air, occur regularly.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Importance\">Importance<\/p>\n<p>Most of the events of Jesus’ life took place in Galilee, especially around Gennesaret, the most densely populated area of Palestine. He is said to have lived at Capernaum (Mt 4:13), and he did many miracles there (11:23). Because the area on the west of the lake was a health resort, Jesus found many infirm people there and healed them (Mk 1:32-34; 6:53-56). Other important occurrences in relation to the sea were the Sermon on the Mount, traditionally near Capernaum (Mt 5:1ff.; cf. 8:1, 5); the drowning of the swine in the region of the Gadarenes (8:28-34); the curse on Korazin (11:21); the calming of the sea (8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-24); and Jesus’ walking on the water (Mt 14:22-23; Mk 6:45-51; Jn 6:16-21).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Galilee; Palestine.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SEA OF GALILEE A large body of water in Palestine. It has had many names in its history. In the OT the Sea of Galilee was known as the Sea of Chinnereth or Kinnereth (Nm 34:11), named for the town (Jos 19:35), or as Chinneroth (12:3). Later, the name was changed to Lake of Gennesaret because the city of Gennesaret was located on the site of Chinnereth or Tell Ureime (Lk 5:1; 1 Macc 11:67). The most familiar name—the Sea of Galilee—was due to its connection with the province of Galilee to the ...","summary_en":"SEA OF GALILEE A large body of water in Palestine. It has had many names in its history. In the OT the Sea of Galilee was known as the Sea of Chinnereth or Kinnereth (Nm 34:11), named for the town (Jos 19:35), or as Chinneroth (12:3). Later, the name was changed to Lake of Gennesaret because the city of Gennesaret was located on the site of Chinnereth or Tell Ureime (Lk 5:1; 1 Macc 11:67). The most familiar name—the Sea of Galilee—was due to its connection with the province of Galilee to the ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65818,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93444,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121070,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148696,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":56433,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:18","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:18","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:18<\/strong> East-west winds blowing down over the eastern cliffs of the Sea of Galilee late in the day commonly caused <em>very rough<\/em> waters and turbulent storms.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:18<\/strong> East-west winds blowing down over the eastern cliffs of the Sea of Galilee late in the day commonly caused <em>very rough<\/em> waters and turbulent storms.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:18 East-west winds blowing down over the eastern cliffs of the Sea of Galilee late in the day commonly caused very rough waters and turbulent storms.","summary_en":"6:18 East-west winds blowing down over the eastern cliffs of the Sea of Galilee late in the day commonly caused very rough waters and turbulent storms.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84059,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:18","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:18","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:18<\/strong> East-west winds blowing down over the eastern cliffs of the Sea of Galilee late in the day commonly caused <em>very rough<\/em> waters and turbulent storms.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:18<\/strong> East-west winds blowing down over the eastern cliffs of the Sea of Galilee late in the day commonly caused <em>very rough<\/em> waters and turbulent storms.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:18 East-west winds blowing down over the eastern cliffs of the Sea of Galilee late in the day commonly caused very rough waters and turbulent storms.","summary_en":"6:18 East-west winds blowing down over the eastern cliffs of the Sea of Galilee late in the day commonly caused very rough waters and turbulent storms.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111685,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:18","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:18","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:18<\/strong> East-west winds blowing down over the eastern cliffs of the Sea of Galilee late in the day commonly caused <em>very rough<\/em> waters and turbulent storms.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:18<\/strong> East-west winds blowing down over the eastern cliffs of the Sea of Galilee late in the day commonly caused <em>very rough<\/em> waters and turbulent storms.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:18 East-west winds blowing down over the eastern cliffs of the Sea of Galilee late in the day commonly caused very rough waters and turbulent storms.","summary_en":"6:18 East-west winds blowing down over the eastern cliffs of the Sea of Galilee late in the day commonly caused very rough waters and turbulent storms.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139311,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:18","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:18","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:18<\/strong> East-west winds blowing down over the eastern cliffs of the Sea of Galilee late in the day commonly caused <em>very rough<\/em> waters and turbulent storms.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:18<\/strong> East-west winds blowing down over the eastern cliffs of the Sea of Galilee late in the day commonly caused <em>very rough<\/em> waters and turbulent storms.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:18 East-west winds blowing down over the eastern cliffs of the Sea of Galilee late in the day commonly caused very rough waters and turbulent storms.","summary_en":"6:18 East-west winds blowing down over the eastern cliffs of the Sea of Galilee late in the day commonly caused very rough waters and turbulent storms.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":33517,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sailors","title_en":"Sailors","content_ro":"<h3>SAILORS<\/h3>\n<p>Men trained in sailing ships at sea. The people of Israel were not generally seafaring and confined their activities on the water to the Sea of Galilee and the Jordan River. Occasionally, they may have had contact with large ships (Gn 49:13; Jgs 5:17). Solomon had a fleet of ships at Ezion-geber on the Gulf of Aqaba (1 Kgs 9:26-28; 2 Chr 8:17-18; 9:21). Jehoshaphat, too, had a fleet at Ezion-geber (1 Kgs 22:48; 2 Chr 20:35-37).<\/p>\n<p>The NT frequently mentions ships and sailors—the numerous fishing boats on Galilee (Mt 14:22; Mk 1:19; 3:9; Lk 5:2; Jn 6:19, 22-24; 21:8) and the large ships such as the one in which Paul traveled to Rome (Acts 27:6-44). Shipmen or sailors are mentioned in Acts 27:27, 30. The term “mariner” (<span>kjv<\/span>) refers to a sailor (Ez 27:9, 27-29; Jon 1:5).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SAILORS<\/h3>\n<p>Men trained in sailing ships at sea. The people of Israel were not generally seafaring and confined their activities on the water to the Sea of Galilee and the Jordan River. Occasionally, they may have had contact with large ships (Gn 49:13; Jgs 5:17). Solomon had a fleet of ships at Ezion-geber on the Gulf of Aqaba (1 Kgs 9:26-28; 2 Chr 8:17-18; 9:21). Jehoshaphat, too, had a fleet at Ezion-geber (1 Kgs 22:48; 2 Chr 20:35-37).<\/p>\n<p>The NT frequently mentions ships and sailors—the numerous fishing boats on Galilee (Mt 14:22; Mk 1:19; 3:9; Lk 5:2; Jn 6:19, 22-24; 21:8) and the large ships such as the one in which Paul traveled to Rome (Acts 27:6-44). Shipmen or sailors are mentioned in Acts 27:27, 30. The term “mariner” (<span>kjv<\/span>) refers to a sailor (Ez 27:9, 27-29; Jon 1:5).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SAILORS Men trained in sailing ships at sea. The people of Israel were not generally seafaring and confined their activities on the water to the Sea of Galilee and the Jordan River. Occasionally, they may have had contact with large ships (Gn 49:13; Jgs 5:17). Solomon had a fleet of ships at Ezion-geber on the Gulf of Aqaba (1 Kgs 9:26-28; 2 Chr 8:17-18; 9:21). Jehoshaphat, too, had a fleet at Ezion-geber (1 Kgs 22:48; 2 Chr 20:35-37). The NT frequently mentions ships and sailors—the numerous...","summary_en":"SAILORS Men trained in sailing ships at sea. The people of Israel were not generally seafaring and confined their activities on the water to the Sea of Galilee and the Jordan River. Occasionally, they may have had contact with large ships (Gn 49:13; Jgs 5:17). Solomon had a fleet of ships at Ezion-geber on the Gulf of Aqaba (1 Kgs 9:26-28; 2 Chr 8:17-18; 9:21). Jehoshaphat, too, had a fleet at Ezion-geber (1 Kgs 22:48; 2 Chr 20:35-37). The NT frequently mentions ships and sailors—the numerous...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56434,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:19<\/strong> The disciples’ fear of the storm was now surpassed by their fear of <em>Jesus<\/em><em>,<\/em> who came <em>walking on the water<\/em> to help them. This act recalled Moses, who led Israel through the water (Exod 14; see Ps 77:19-20).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:19<\/strong> The disciples’ fear of the storm was now surpassed by their fear of <em>Jesus<\/em><em>,<\/em> who came <em>walking on the water<\/em> to help them. This act recalled Moses, who led Israel through the water (Exod 14; see Ps 77:19-20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:19 The disciples’ fear of the storm was now surpassed by their fear of Jesus, who came walking on the water to help them. This act recalled Moses, who led Israel through the water (Exod 14; see Ps 77:19-20).","summary_en":"6:19 The disciples’ fear of the storm was now surpassed by their fear of Jesus, who came walking on the water to help them. This act recalled Moses, who led Israel through the water (Exod 14; see Ps 77:19-20).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84060,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:19<\/strong> The disciples’ fear of the storm was now surpassed by their fear of <em>Jesus<\/em><em>,<\/em> who came <em>walking on the water<\/em> to help them. This act recalled Moses, who led Israel through the water (Exod 14; see Ps 77:19-20).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:19<\/strong> The disciples’ fear of the storm was now surpassed by their fear of <em>Jesus<\/em><em>,<\/em> who came <em>walking on the water<\/em> to help them. This act recalled Moses, who led Israel through the water (Exod 14; see Ps 77:19-20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:19 The disciples’ fear of the storm was now surpassed by their fear of Jesus, who came walking on the water to help them. This act recalled Moses, who led Israel through the water (Exod 14; see Ps 77:19-20).","summary_en":"6:19 The disciples’ fear of the storm was now surpassed by their fear of Jesus, who came walking on the water to help them. This act recalled Moses, who led Israel through the water (Exod 14; see Ps 77:19-20).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111686,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:19<\/strong> The disciples’ fear of the storm was now surpassed by their fear of <em>Jesus<\/em><em>,<\/em> who came <em>walking on the water<\/em> to help them. This act recalled Moses, who led Israel through the water (Exod 14; see Ps 77:19-20).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:19<\/strong> The disciples’ fear of the storm was now surpassed by their fear of <em>Jesus<\/em><em>,<\/em> who came <em>walking on the water<\/em> to help them. This act recalled Moses, who led Israel through the water (Exod 14; see Ps 77:19-20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:19 The disciples’ fear of the storm was now surpassed by their fear of Jesus, who came walking on the water to help them. This act recalled Moses, who led Israel through the water (Exod 14; see Ps 77:19-20).","summary_en":"6:19 The disciples’ fear of the storm was now surpassed by their fear of Jesus, who came walking on the water to help them. This act recalled Moses, who led Israel through the water (Exod 14; see Ps 77:19-20).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139312,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:19","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:19<\/strong> The disciples’ fear of the storm was now surpassed by their fear of <em>Jesus<\/em><em>,<\/em> who came <em>walking on the water<\/em> to help them. This act recalled Moses, who led Israel through the water (Exod 14; see Ps 77:19-20).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:19<\/strong> The disciples’ fear of the storm was now surpassed by their fear of <em>Jesus<\/em><em>,<\/em> who came <em>walking on the water<\/em> to help them. This act recalled Moses, who led Israel through the water (Exod 14; see Ps 77:19-20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:19 The disciples’ fear of the storm was now surpassed by their fear of Jesus, who came walking on the water to help them. This act recalled Moses, who led Israel through the water (Exod 14; see Ps 77:19-20).","summary_en":"6:19 The disciples’ fear of the storm was now surpassed by their fear of Jesus, who came walking on the water to help them. This act recalled Moses, who led Israel through the water (Exod 14; see Ps 77:19-20).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"20":[{"id":56435,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:20","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:20<\/strong> <em>I am here<\/em> (Greek reads <em>I am<\/em>): Jesus identified himself by the name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 6:35).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:20<\/strong> <em>I am here<\/em> (Greek reads <em>I am<\/em>): Jesus identified himself by the name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 6:35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:20 I am here (Greek reads I am): Jesus identified himself by the name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 6:35).","summary_en":"6:20 I am here (Greek reads I am): Jesus identified himself by the name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 6:35).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84061,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:20","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:20<\/strong> <em>I am here<\/em> (Greek reads <em>I am<\/em>): Jesus identified himself by the name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 6:35).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:20<\/strong> <em>I am here<\/em> (Greek reads <em>I am<\/em>): Jesus identified himself by the name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 6:35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:20 I am here (Greek reads I am): Jesus identified himself by the name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 6:35).","summary_en":"6:20 I am here (Greek reads I am): Jesus identified himself by the name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 6:35).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111687,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:20","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:20<\/strong> <em>I am here<\/em> (Greek reads <em>I am<\/em>): Jesus identified himself by the name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 6:35).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:20<\/strong> <em>I am here<\/em> (Greek reads <em>I am<\/em>): Jesus identified himself by the name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 6:35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:20 I am here (Greek reads I am): Jesus identified himself by the name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 6:35).","summary_en":"6:20 I am here (Greek reads I am): Jesus identified himself by the name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 6:35).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139313,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:20","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:20<\/strong> <em>I am here<\/em> (Greek reads <em>I am<\/em>): Jesus identified himself by the name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 6:35).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:20<\/strong> <em>I am here<\/em> (Greek reads <em>I am<\/em>): Jesus identified himself by the name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 6:35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:20 I am here (Greek reads I am): Jesus identified himself by the name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 6:35).","summary_en":"6:20 I am here (Greek reads I am): Jesus identified himself by the name God had revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai (see Exod 3:14; see also John 4:26; 6:35).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"21":[{"id":56436,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:21","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:21<\/strong> <em>immediately they arrived at their destination:<\/em> The immediacy was yet another of Jesus’ miracles.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:21<\/strong> <em>immediately they arrived at their destination:<\/em> The immediacy was yet another of Jesus’ miracles.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:21 immediately they arrived at their destination: The immediacy was yet another of Jesus’ miracles.","summary_en":"6:21 immediately they arrived at their destination: The immediacy was yet another of Jesus’ miracles.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84062,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:21","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:21<\/strong> <em>immediately they arrived at their destination:<\/em> The immediacy was yet another of Jesus’ miracles.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:21<\/strong> <em>immediately they arrived at their destination:<\/em> The immediacy was yet another of Jesus’ miracles.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:21 immediately they arrived at their destination: The immediacy was yet another of Jesus’ miracles.","summary_en":"6:21 immediately they arrived at their destination: The immediacy was yet another of Jesus’ miracles.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111688,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:21","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:21<\/strong> <em>immediately they arrived at their destination:<\/em> The immediacy was yet another of Jesus’ miracles.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:21<\/strong> <em>immediately they arrived at their destination:<\/em> The immediacy was yet another of Jesus’ miracles.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:21 immediately they arrived at their destination: The immediacy was yet another of Jesus’ miracles.","summary_en":"6:21 immediately they arrived at their destination: The immediacy was yet another of Jesus’ miracles.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139314,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:21","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:21<\/strong> <em>immediately they arrived at their destination:<\/em> The immediacy was yet another of Jesus’ miracles.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:21<\/strong> <em>immediately they arrived at their destination:<\/em> The immediacy was yet another of Jesus’ miracles.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:21 immediately they arrived at their destination: The immediacy was yet another of Jesus’ miracles.","summary_en":"6:21 immediately they arrived at their destination: The immediacy was yet another of Jesus’ miracles.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"22":[{"id":20214,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of John","title_en":"Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","summary_en":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60602,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88228,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115854,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143480,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"23":[{"id":37284,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Tiberias","title_en":"Tiberias","content_ro":"<h3>TIBERIAS<\/h3>\n<p>City midway along the western shores of Lake Galilee, built about <span>AD<\/span> 20 by Herod Antipas, Herod the Great’s son and the tetrarch of Galilee and Perea (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 39), who named the town in honor of the emperor Tiberius. The name is preserved in the modern town Tabariyeh. The site became his new capital after abandoning Sepphoris, which he built in 4 <span>BC<\/span>. The location of Tiberias had several advantages: it lay just below a rocky projection above the lake, a natural acropolis that offered good protection; it was a center where roads from north, south, and west met, allowing Herod to move readily to various parts of his domain; and a little to the south lay famous warm springs, which were known to the Roman writer Pliny the Elder, who spoke of their health-giving qualities. Herod built a lakeside palace, feeling secure in the knowledge that a naturally fortified acropolis lay behind him. From there he would have enjoyed a superb panorama, which took in the whole of Galilee at a glance.<\/p>\n<p>During the building of the town, a necropolis was discovered, which led to the Jewish abandonment of the site. The town was subsequently settled by a heterogeneous company of Gentiles, some of whom were brought forcibly to the place by Herod. By offering good houses and land to all, Herod assembled a sizable population (Josephus’s <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.2.3). According to the Gospels, Jesus never went there, probably in deference to Jewish scruples about the pollution caused by corpses. The town is mentioned only once in the NT (Jn 6:23), where boats came from Tiberias following the episode of the feeding of the 5,000. The Sea of Tiberias, that is, Lake Galilee, is referred to in John 6:1 and 21:1.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TIBERIAS<\/h3>\n<p>City midway along the western shores of Lake Galilee, built about <span>AD<\/span> 20 by Herod Antipas, Herod the Great’s son and the tetrarch of Galilee and Perea (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 39), who named the town in honor of the emperor Tiberius. The name is preserved in the modern town Tabariyeh. The site became his new capital after abandoning Sepphoris, which he built in 4 <span>BC<\/span>. The location of Tiberias had several advantages: it lay just below a rocky projection above the lake, a natural acropolis that offered good protection; it was a center where roads from north, south, and west met, allowing Herod to move readily to various parts of his domain; and a little to the south lay famous warm springs, which were known to the Roman writer Pliny the Elder, who spoke of their health-giving qualities. Herod built a lakeside palace, feeling secure in the knowledge that a naturally fortified acropolis lay behind him. From there he would have enjoyed a superb panorama, which took in the whole of Galilee at a glance.<\/p>\n<p>During the building of the town, a necropolis was discovered, which led to the Jewish abandonment of the site. The town was subsequently settled by a heterogeneous company of Gentiles, some of whom were brought forcibly to the place by Herod. By offering good houses and land to all, Herod assembled a sizable population (Josephus’s <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.2.3). According to the Gospels, Jesus never went there, probably in deference to Jewish scruples about the pollution caused by corpses. The town is mentioned only once in the NT (Jn 6:23), where boats came from Tiberias following the episode of the feeding of the 5,000. The Sea of Tiberias, that is, Lake Galilee, is referred to in John 6:1 and 21:1.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TIBERIAS City midway along the western shores of Lake Galilee, built about AD 20 by Herod Antipas, Herod the Great’s son and the tetrarch of Galilee and Perea (4 BC–AD 39), who named the town in honor of the emperor Tiberius. The name is preserved in the modern town Tabariyeh. The site became his new capital after abandoning Sepphoris, which he built in 4 BC. The location of Tiberias had several advantages: it lay just below a rocky projection above the lake, a natural acropolis that offered ...","summary_en":"TIBERIAS City midway along the western shores of Lake Galilee, built about AD 20 by Herod Antipas, Herod the Great’s son and the tetrarch of Galilee and Perea (4 BC–AD 39), who named the town in honor of the emperor Tiberius. The name is preserved in the modern town Tabariyeh. The site became his new capital after abandoning Sepphoris, which he built in 4 BC. The location of Tiberias had several advantages: it lay just below a rocky projection above the lake, a natural acropolis that offered ...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"24":[{"id":56437,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:24","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:24<\/strong> The <em>crowd<\/em> sailed north to <em>Capernaum<\/em> to search for Jesus because he had made Capernaum his home in Galilee (Mark 2:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:24<\/strong> The <em>crowd<\/em> sailed north to <em>Capernaum<\/em> to search for Jesus because he had made Capernaum his home in Galilee (Mark 2:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:24 The crowd sailed north to Capernaum to search for Jesus because he had made Capernaum his home in Galilee (Mark 2:1).","summary_en":"6:24 The crowd sailed north to Capernaum to search for Jesus because he had made Capernaum his home in Galilee (Mark 2:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84063,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:24","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:24<\/strong> The <em>crowd<\/em> sailed north to <em>Capernaum<\/em> to search for Jesus because he had made Capernaum his home in Galilee (Mark 2:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:24<\/strong> The <em>crowd<\/em> sailed north to <em>Capernaum<\/em> to search for Jesus because he had made Capernaum his home in Galilee (Mark 2:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:24 The crowd sailed north to Capernaum to search for Jesus because he had made Capernaum his home in Galilee (Mark 2:1).","summary_en":"6:24 The crowd sailed north to Capernaum to search for Jesus because he had made Capernaum his home in Galilee (Mark 2:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111689,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:24","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:24<\/strong> The <em>crowd<\/em> sailed north to <em>Capernaum<\/em> to search for Jesus because he had made Capernaum his home in Galilee (Mark 2:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:24<\/strong> The <em>crowd<\/em> sailed north to <em>Capernaum<\/em> to search for Jesus because he had made Capernaum his home in Galilee (Mark 2:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:24 The crowd sailed north to Capernaum to search for Jesus because he had made Capernaum his home in Galilee (Mark 2:1).","summary_en":"6:24 The crowd sailed north to Capernaum to search for Jesus because he had made Capernaum his home in Galilee (Mark 2:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139315,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:24","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:24<\/strong> The <em>crowd<\/em> sailed north to <em>Capernaum<\/em> to search for Jesus because he had made Capernaum his home in Galilee (Mark 2:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:24<\/strong> The <em>crowd<\/em> sailed north to <em>Capernaum<\/em> to search for Jesus because he had made Capernaum his home in Galilee (Mark 2:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:24 The crowd sailed north to Capernaum to search for Jesus because he had made Capernaum his home in Galilee (Mark 2:1).","summary_en":"6:24 The crowd sailed north to Capernaum to search for Jesus because he had made Capernaum his home in Galilee (Mark 2:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"25":[{"id":19501,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24287,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Manna","title_en":"Manna","content_ro":"<h3>MANNA<\/h3>\n<p>Miraculous food the Lord provided for the Israelites in the desert. It originally appeared in the form of thin flakes, like frost on the ground, around the Israelite camp (Ex 16:14-15). It is compared elsewhere with coriander seed and bdellium, or resin (Nm 11:7). Its taste is said to have been like that of honey or of fresh oil (Ex 16:31; Nm 11:8). Since the experience of taste and color is somewhat subjective, these descriptions do not necessarily conflict. The word comes from the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">man<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means, “what?” When the Israelites saw the manna, they asked, “What is it?” (Ex 16:15).<\/p>\n<p>Attempts have been made to link manna with substances discovered by modern travelers in Sinai and Arabia. In early summer (June–July) the tamarisk tree in these regions exudes a sweet-tasting liquid, produced as the result of the activity of a tiny insect. This liquid falls to the ground, where it forms small grains that disappear when the sun gets hot. Reference also has been made to an edible lichen that in parts of southwest Asia is used instead of grain in years of famine. But the regularity, periodicity, and abundance of the manna cannot be explained on any but miraculous grounds. The Israelites were to gather it for one day at a time. Anything collected above that measure was subject to spoiling (16:20). Only the Sabbath day was an exception to that rule. Manna was no longer provided after Israel entered Canaan (Jos 5:12). When Israel craved other food besides manna, the people were punished with an excess of quail (Nm 11:4-6, 18-20). In poetic literature it was called “the grain of heaven” (Ps 78:24; cf. 105:40), and “the bread of angels” (78:25). Jesus pointed to himself as the true manna, the bread from heaven, which, when eaten, would nourish man unto life everlasting (cf. Jn 6:25-59).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MANNA<\/h3>\n<p>Miraculous food the Lord provided for the Israelites in the desert. It originally appeared in the form of thin flakes, like frost on the ground, around the Israelite camp (Ex 16:14-15). It is compared elsewhere with coriander seed and bdellium, or resin (Nm 11:7). Its taste is said to have been like that of honey or of fresh oil (Ex 16:31; Nm 11:8). Since the experience of taste and color is somewhat subjective, these descriptions do not necessarily conflict. The word comes from the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">man<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means, “what?” When the Israelites saw the manna, they asked, “What is it?” (Ex 16:15).<\/p>\n<p>Attempts have been made to link manna with substances discovered by modern travelers in Sinai and Arabia. In early summer (June–July) the tamarisk tree in these regions exudes a sweet-tasting liquid, produced as the result of the activity of a tiny insect. This liquid falls to the ground, where it forms small grains that disappear when the sun gets hot. Reference also has been made to an edible lichen that in parts of southwest Asia is used instead of grain in years of famine. But the regularity, periodicity, and abundance of the manna cannot be explained on any but miraculous grounds. The Israelites were to gather it for one day at a time. Anything collected above that measure was subject to spoiling (16:20). Only the Sabbath day was an exception to that rule. Manna was no longer provided after Israel entered Canaan (Jos 5:12). When Israel craved other food besides manna, the people were punished with an excess of quail (Nm 11:4-6, 18-20). In poetic literature it was called “the grain of heaven” (Ps 78:24; cf. 105:40), and “the bread of angels” (78:25). Jesus pointed to himself as the true manna, the bread from heaven, which, when eaten, would nourish man unto life everlasting (cf. Jn 6:25-59).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MANNA Miraculous food the Lord provided for the Israelites in the desert. It originally appeared in the form of thin flakes, like frost on the ground, around the Israelite camp (Ex 16:14-15). It is compared elsewhere with coriander seed and bdellium, or resin (Nm 11:7). Its taste is said to have been like that of honey or of fresh oil (Ex 16:31; Nm 11:8). Since the experience of taste and color is somewhat subjective, these descriptions do not necessarily conflict. The word comes from the Heb...","summary_en":"MANNA Miraculous food the Lord provided for the Israelites in the desert. It originally appeared in the form of thin flakes, like frost on the ground, around the Israelite camp (Ex 16:14-15). It is compared elsewhere with coriander seed and bdellium, or resin (Nm 11:7). Its taste is said to have been like that of honey or of fresh oil (Ex 16:31; Nm 11:8). Since the experience of taste and color is somewhat subjective, these descriptions do not necessarily conflict. The word comes from the Heb...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32274,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Rabbi","title_en":"Rabbi","content_ro":"<h3>RABBI<\/h3>\n<p>Title of respect, meaning “my great one” or “my superior one,” used in Jesus’ day for Jewish religious teachers.<\/p>\n<p>According to Matthew 23:7, “rabbi” was evidently used as a common title of address for the Jewish scribes and Pharisees. However, in the NT it is most commonly used as a title of respectful address when others were speaking to Jesus. It was used by Nathanael (Jn 1:49), by Peter and Andrew (v 38), by Nicodemus (3:2), by the disciples as a group (9:2; 11:8), and by a crowd generally (6:25). Mary Magdalene (Mk 10:51) and blind Bartimaeus (Jn 20:16) both use the longer form, “rabboni,” to address Jesus directly, thus indicating even more profound respect than the use of the shorter title “rabbi.” By the time of the writing of John’s Gospel, the title “rabbi” meant “teacher”; John explicitly states this in 1:38 and implicitly says this in 3:2.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus condemns the scribes and the Pharisees for their evident pride displayed in their love of being greeted in the marketplaces and their insistence on having people call them “rabbi” (Mt 23:7-8). Jesus prohibited the use of the title for his own disciples, saying, “You are not to be called rabbi.” However, Jesus’ prohibition was more against seeking to be called this and insisting on it than the legitimate possession of the title itself. In fact, when people did use the title of Jesus in a reverent way, they were not in any way rebuked.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RABBI<\/h3>\n<p>Title of respect, meaning “my great one” or “my superior one,” used in Jesus’ day for Jewish religious teachers.<\/p>\n<p>According to Matthew 23:7, “rabbi” was evidently used as a common title of address for the Jewish scribes and Pharisees. However, in the NT it is most commonly used as a title of respectful address when others were speaking to Jesus. It was used by Nathanael (Jn 1:49), by Peter and Andrew (v 38), by Nicodemus (3:2), by the disciples as a group (9:2; 11:8), and by a crowd generally (6:25). Mary Magdalene (Mk 10:51) and blind Bartimaeus (Jn 20:16) both use the longer form, “rabboni,” to address Jesus directly, thus indicating even more profound respect than the use of the shorter title “rabbi.” By the time of the writing of John’s Gospel, the title “rabbi” meant “teacher”; John explicitly states this in 1:38 and implicitly says this in 3:2.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus condemns the scribes and the Pharisees for their evident pride displayed in their love of being greeted in the marketplaces and their insistence on having people call them “rabbi” (Mt 23:7-8). Jesus prohibited the use of the title for his own disciples, saying, “You are not to be called rabbi.” However, Jesus’ prohibition was more against seeking to be called this and insisting on it than the legitimate possession of the title itself. In fact, when people did use the title of Jesus in a reverent way, they were not in any way rebuked.<\/p>","summary_ro":"RABBI Title of respect, meaning “my great one” or “my superior one,” used in Jesus’ day for Jewish religious teachers. According to Matthew 23:7, “rabbi” was evidently used as a common title of address for the Jewish scribes and Pharisees. However, in the NT it is most commonly used as a title of respectful address when others were speaking to Jesus. It was used by Nathanael (Jn 1:49), by Peter and Andrew (v 38), by Nicodemus (3:2), by the disciples as a group (9:2; 11:8), and by a crowd gene...","summary_en":"RABBI Title of respect, meaning “my great one” or “my superior one,” used in Jesus’ day for Jewish religious teachers. According to Matthew 23:7, “rabbi” was evidently used as a common title of address for the Jewish scribes and Pharisees. However, in the NT it is most commonly used as a title of respectful address when others were speaking to Jesus. It was used by Nathanael (Jn 1:49), by Peter and Andrew (v 38), by Nicodemus (3:2), by the disciples as a group (9:2; 11:8), and by a crowd gene...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"26":[{"id":56438,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:26","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:26-59<\/strong> This dialogue took place in the synagogue at Capernaum (6:59) shortly before Passover (6:4), when Jews read the account of the exodus from Egypt (see Exod 1–15).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:26-59<\/strong> This dialogue took place in the synagogue at Capernaum (6:59) shortly before Passover (6:4), when Jews read the account of the exodus from Egypt (see Exod 1–15).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:26-59 This dialogue took place in the synagogue at Capernaum (6:59) shortly before Passover (6:4), when Jews read the account of the exodus from Egypt (see Exod 1–15).","summary_en":"6:26-59 This dialogue took place in the synagogue at Capernaum (6:59) shortly before Passover (6:4), when Jews read the account of the exodus from Egypt (see Exod 1–15).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56439,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:26","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:26<\/strong> The crowd, which had concluded that Jesus was a prophet and wanted to take advantage of him politically (see 6:15), failed to see the meaning of the miracle, which Jesus then explained (6:27-59).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:26<\/strong> The crowd, which had concluded that Jesus was a prophet and wanted to take advantage of him politically (see 6:15), failed to see the meaning of the miracle, which Jesus then explained (6:27-59).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:26 The crowd, which had concluded that Jesus was a prophet and wanted to take advantage of him politically (see 6:15), failed to see the meaning of the miracle, which Jesus then explained (6:27-59).","summary_en":"6:26 The crowd, which had concluded that Jesus was a prophet and wanted to take advantage of him politically (see 6:15), failed to see the meaning of the miracle, which Jesus then explained (6:27-59).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84064,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:26","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:26-59<\/strong> This dialogue took place in the synagogue at Capernaum (6:59) shortly before Passover (6:4), when Jews read the account of the exodus from Egypt (see Exod 1–15).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:26-59<\/strong> This dialogue took place in the synagogue at Capernaum (6:59) shortly before Passover (6:4), when Jews read the account of the exodus from Egypt (see Exod 1–15).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:26-59 This dialogue took place in the synagogue at Capernaum (6:59) shortly before Passover (6:4), when Jews read the account of the exodus from Egypt (see Exod 1–15).","summary_en":"6:26-59 This dialogue took place in the synagogue at Capernaum (6:59) shortly before Passover (6:4), when Jews read the account of the exodus from Egypt (see Exod 1–15).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84065,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:26","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:26<\/strong> The crowd, which had concluded that Jesus was a prophet and wanted to take advantage of him politically (see 6:15), failed to see the meaning of the miracle, which Jesus then explained (6:27-59).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:26<\/strong> The crowd, which had concluded that Jesus was a prophet and wanted to take advantage of him politically (see 6:15), failed to see the meaning of the miracle, which Jesus then explained (6:27-59).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:26 The crowd, which had concluded that Jesus was a prophet and wanted to take advantage of him politically (see 6:15), failed to see the meaning of the miracle, which Jesus then explained (6:27-59).","summary_en":"6:26 The crowd, which had concluded that Jesus was a prophet and wanted to take advantage of him politically (see 6:15), failed to see the meaning of the miracle, which Jesus then explained (6:27-59).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111690,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:26","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:26-59<\/strong> This dialogue took place in the synagogue at Capernaum (6:59) shortly before Passover (6:4), when Jews read the account of the exodus from Egypt (see Exod 1–15).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:26-59<\/strong> This dialogue took place in the synagogue at Capernaum (6:59) shortly before Passover (6:4), when Jews read the account of the exodus from Egypt (see Exod 1–15).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:26-59 This dialogue took place in the synagogue at Capernaum (6:59) shortly before Passover (6:4), when Jews read the account of the exodus from Egypt (see Exod 1–15).","summary_en":"6:26-59 This dialogue took place in the synagogue at Capernaum (6:59) shortly before Passover (6:4), when Jews read the account of the exodus from Egypt (see Exod 1–15).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111691,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:26","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:26<\/strong> The crowd, which had concluded that Jesus was a prophet and wanted to take advantage of him politically (see 6:15), failed to see the meaning of the miracle, which Jesus then explained (6:27-59).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:26<\/strong> The crowd, which had concluded that Jesus was a prophet and wanted to take advantage of him politically (see 6:15), failed to see the meaning of the miracle, which Jesus then explained (6:27-59).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:26 The crowd, which had concluded that Jesus was a prophet and wanted to take advantage of him politically (see 6:15), failed to see the meaning of the miracle, which Jesus then explained (6:27-59).","summary_en":"6:26 The crowd, which had concluded that Jesus was a prophet and wanted to take advantage of him politically (see 6:15), failed to see the meaning of the miracle, which Jesus then explained (6:27-59).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139316,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:26","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:26-59<\/strong> This dialogue took place in the synagogue at Capernaum (6:59) shortly before Passover (6:4), when Jews read the account of the exodus from Egypt (see Exod 1–15).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:26-59<\/strong> This dialogue took place in the synagogue at Capernaum (6:59) shortly before Passover (6:4), when Jews read the account of the exodus from Egypt (see Exod 1–15).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:26-59 This dialogue took place in the synagogue at Capernaum (6:59) shortly before Passover (6:4), when Jews read the account of the exodus from Egypt (see Exod 1–15).","summary_en":"6:26-59 This dialogue took place in the synagogue at Capernaum (6:59) shortly before Passover (6:4), when Jews read the account of the exodus from Egypt (see Exod 1–15).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139317,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:26","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:26<\/strong> The crowd, which had concluded that Jesus was a prophet and wanted to take advantage of him politically (see 6:15), failed to see the meaning of the miracle, which Jesus then explained (6:27-59).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:26<\/strong> The crowd, which had concluded that Jesus was a prophet and wanted to take advantage of him politically (see 6:15), failed to see the meaning of the miracle, which Jesus then explained (6:27-59).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:26 The crowd, which had concluded that Jesus was a prophet and wanted to take advantage of him politically (see 6:15), failed to see the meaning of the miracle, which Jesus then explained (6:27-59).","summary_en":"6:26 The crowd, which had concluded that Jesus was a prophet and wanted to take advantage of him politically (see 6:15), failed to see the meaning of the miracle, which Jesus then explained (6:27-59).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60151,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Famine","title_en":"Famine","content_ro":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","summary_en":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65842,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66377,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miracles","title_en":"Miracles","content_ro":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","summary_en":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87777,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Famine","title_en":"Famine","content_ro":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","summary_en":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93468,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94003,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miracles","title_en":"Miracles","content_ro":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","summary_en":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115403,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Famine","title_en":"Famine","content_ro":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","summary_en":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121094,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121629,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miracles","title_en":"Miracles","content_ro":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","summary_en":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143029,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Famine","title_en":"Famine","content_ro":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","summary_en":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148720,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149255,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miracles","title_en":"Miracles","content_ro":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miracles<\/h3>\n<p>Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in more than the miracle itself (see John 12:37). Miracles remind us of the truth that anything is possible for God (Mark 9:21-23; cp. Matt 19:26; Mark 10:27; Luke 1:37; 18:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus performed many miracles during his ministry including physical healings, exorcisms, nature miracles, and raising the dead. Jesus demonstrated a deep love for humankind in the way he responded to people’s needs, and many people followed him in response to his miracles (John 6:2), though he cautioned against following him just because of the miracles (John 6:26). Perhaps the three greatest miracles that occurred in relation to Jesus are (1) his coming as the Word of God in human flesh (John 1:14), (2) his glorious resurrection from the dead (Matt 28; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-31; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor 15:3-8; cp Acts 23:6; 26:8), and (3) the miracle of the new birth (John 3:3-8; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:8-10). The coming of Jesus into the world to be the Savior and to die for our sins shows us how much God loves us (John 3:16; Rom 5:8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5; 1 Jn 3:1-2). The fact that God raised Jesus from the dead reveals God’s power over death and gives us a living hope, the promise of eternal life (1 Pet 1:3-9). And the person who puts faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord is born anew as a child of God and receives eternal life (John 1:12; 3:36; Rom 5:1-2; 1 Jn 5:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The miraculous activity of Jesus continued in the work of his followers, as demonstrated throughout the book of Acts (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-15; 6:8; 8:6-7; 9:32-42; 14:3). Filled with the Holy Spirit, the apostles and other Christian leaders performed these miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works, often in order to offer tangible evidence of the power and truth of the Christian message (14:3; see John 3:2; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 19:23-26; 28:1-20; Mark 10:23-27; Luke 1:30-38; 18:24-27; 24:1-53; John 1:12-14; 3:2-8, 16; 20:1–21:25; Acts 4:29-31; 5:12-16; 6:8; 8:4-23; 9:32-42; 14:3-4; 26:8; Rom 5:1, 8; 8:32; Eph 2:4-5, 8-10; Heb 2:4; 1 Pet 1:3-5; 1 Jn 5:12-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","summary_en":"Miracles Miracles occur frequently in the biblical narrative. They are particularly concentrated during the time of Moses and during the ministries of Elijah\/Elisha, Jesus, and the apostles. The Bible does not attempt to prove miracles, but simply reports them. Miracles demonstrate both the power of God over the natural order and the compassion of God in response to human need. Miracles can lead to belief in God (John 2:23), though they do not necessarily do so and though one must believe in ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"27":[{"id":11200,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Eternal Life","title_en":"Eternal Life","content_ro":"<h3>ETERNAL LIFE<\/h3>\n<p>Mode of existence referred to in Scripture characterized by either timelessness or immortality; kind of life attributed to God and distributed to believers. The perspective of the biblical writers flowed from an understanding of a living God who existed prior to the world’s creation and who will continue to exist when the end of time arrives. God’s gift to those who are obedient and responsible to him is designated as “eternal life” or some such synonym. John’s Gospel provides the most definitive material on eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “eternal life” occurs only once in the Greek version of the OT (Dn 12:2, with the basic meaning of “the life of the age,” designating the life of the age beyond the resurrection from the dead). The primary meaning of “life” in the OT, however, is the quality of well-being in earthly existence.<\/p>\n<p>In the intertestamental period, the rabbinic distinction between “this age” and “the age which is to come” emphasized that the concept of life in the new age consists of a qualitative, rather than simply a quantitative, distinction from the present age.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word translated “eternal” is derived from the word for “age” or “eon.” The setting of the NT within the context of Judaism, with its concept of a living God and the consequent promise of “the age which is to come,” gives depth and color to the meaning of the adjective “eternal.” Jesus Christ’s coming as God’s definitive revelation brings the possibility of the qualities of life in the future messianic age into present reality.<\/p>\n<p>The rich young ruler came to Jesus and asked for directions on how to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). He was obviously thinking of resurrection in the age to come. Jesus answered in the same terms (v 30).<\/p>\n<p>In his response to the rich young ruler, Jesus equated the reception of eternal life with entrance into the kingdom of God (Mk 10:23-25). The kingdom of God is not simply a future event but is already inaugurated in Jesus’ life, ministry, and teachings. The kingdom is a gift of life available while the follower still lives within the present age. Many of Jesus’ parables emphasize this point (e.g., those in Mt 13). The Beatitudes in the Sermon on the Mount (5:3-12) reinforce the concept of a present blessedness that includes salvation, forgiveness, and righteousness. Thus eternal life is a present blessing available to those who submit to God’s reign and are enjoying the blessing of this new era of salvation before the final consummation at the present age’s end.<\/p>\n<p>The definitive discussion of eternal life comes from John’s Gospel. John’s purpose delineates the crucial significance of the concept: “But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name” (Jn 20:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). The earliest Johannine reference to eternal life is found in John 3:15.<\/p>\n<p>John clearly shared in the Jewish expectation of the age to come with its anticipated blessings (e.g., Jn 3:36; 4:14; 5:29, 39; 6:27; 12:25). Eternal life is defined by the special gifts of the messianic age when it arrives at consummation. Lazarus’s resurrection (ch 11) was a living parable demonstrating the future life available to those who trust in Christ. Martha, before her brother’s actual resurrection, asserted her belief that Lazarus would be raised on the last day (v 24). Jesus responded that he himself is the resurrection and the life, and that those who believe in him will never die, even if they die physically (vv 25-26).<\/p>\n<p>The central emphasis of John’s Gospel, however, does not lie in the anticipated future but in the present experience of that future life. The life of the age to come is already available in Christ to the believer. The metaphors with which Jesus defined his own mission emphasize the present new life: living water that is a spring of water welling up to eternal life (Jn 4:10-14); living bread that satisfies the world’s spiritual hunger (6:35-40); the light of the world who leads his followers into the light of life (8:12); the good shepherd who brings abundant life (10:10); the life giver who raises the dead (11:25); the way, the truth, and the life (14:6); and the genuine vine who sustains those who abide in him (15:5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was very careful to note that the accomplishment of his mission did not rest in his own nature and ability but in the Father who sent him. Jesus’ submission to the Father highlights again the fact that life is a gift of God. Those who believe in the Son of God are recipients of the life that God alone gives—eternal life. Thus the promise of resurrection for all believers, made explicit in Lazarus’s resurrection and guaranteed in Christ’s resurrection as the “firstfruits” (in Pauline terminology, <span>kjv<\/span> 1 Cor 15:23), is the natural consequence of God’s gift (Jn 5:26-29).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus added further content to the concept of eternal life by connecting it with knowing the true God (Jn 17:3). In Greek thought, knowledge referred to the result of either contemplation or mystical ecstasy. In the OT, however, knowledge meant experience, relationship, fellowship, and concern (cf. Jer 31:34). This connotation of knowledge as intimate relationship is underlined by the usage of the verb form to designate sexual relations between male and female (cf. Gn 4:1). Jesus stated, “I am the good shepherd; I know my own and my own know me, as the Father knows me and I know the Father” (Jn 10:14-15, <span>rsv<\/span>). The intimate and mutual relationship of Father and Son is the model for the relationship of the Son and his disciples. This knowledge does not come by education or manipulation of the mind but by revelation through the Son (1:18; cf. 14:7).<\/p>\n<p>A brief survey of the primary elements in the concept of eternal life clearly shows that it is not simply an endless or everlasting life. Although there are no final boundaries to eternal life, the Bible’s primary emphasis is on the quality of life, especially its divine elements. Eternal life is the importation of the qualities of the age to come into the present through the revelation of a faithful God in Christ, and it brings knowledge of God’s relationship with him.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Life; New Creation, New Creature; Regeneration.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ETERNAL LIFE<\/h3>\n<p>Mode of existence referred to in Scripture characterized by either timelessness or immortality; kind of life attributed to God and distributed to believers. The perspective of the biblical writers flowed from an understanding of a living God who existed prior to the world’s creation and who will continue to exist when the end of time arrives. God’s gift to those who are obedient and responsible to him is designated as “eternal life” or some such synonym. John’s Gospel provides the most definitive material on eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “eternal life” occurs only once in the Greek version of the OT (Dn 12:2, with the basic meaning of “the life of the age,” designating the life of the age beyond the resurrection from the dead). The primary meaning of “life” in the OT, however, is the quality of well-being in earthly existence.<\/p>\n<p>In the intertestamental period, the rabbinic distinction between “this age” and “the age which is to come” emphasized that the concept of life in the new age consists of a qualitative, rather than simply a quantitative, distinction from the present age.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word translated “eternal” is derived from the word for “age” or “eon.” The setting of the NT within the context of Judaism, with its concept of a living God and the consequent promise of “the age which is to come,” gives depth and color to the meaning of the adjective “eternal.” Jesus Christ’s coming as God’s definitive revelation brings the possibility of the qualities of life in the future messianic age into present reality.<\/p>\n<p>The rich young ruler came to Jesus and asked for directions on how to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). He was obviously thinking of resurrection in the age to come. Jesus answered in the same terms (v 30).<\/p>\n<p>In his response to the rich young ruler, Jesus equated the reception of eternal life with entrance into the kingdom of God (Mk 10:23-25). The kingdom of God is not simply a future event but is already inaugurated in Jesus’ life, ministry, and teachings. The kingdom is a gift of life available while the follower still lives within the present age. Many of Jesus’ parables emphasize this point (e.g., those in Mt 13). The Beatitudes in the Sermon on the Mount (5:3-12) reinforce the concept of a present blessedness that includes salvation, forgiveness, and righteousness. Thus eternal life is a present blessing available to those who submit to God’s reign and are enjoying the blessing of this new era of salvation before the final consummation at the present age’s end.<\/p>\n<p>The definitive discussion of eternal life comes from John’s Gospel. John’s purpose delineates the crucial significance of the concept: “But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name” (Jn 20:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). The earliest Johannine reference to eternal life is found in John 3:15.<\/p>\n<p>John clearly shared in the Jewish expectation of the age to come with its anticipated blessings (e.g., Jn 3:36; 4:14; 5:29, 39; 6:27; 12:25). Eternal life is defined by the special gifts of the messianic age when it arrives at consummation. Lazarus’s resurrection (ch 11) was a living parable demonstrating the future life available to those who trust in Christ. Martha, before her brother’s actual resurrection, asserted her belief that Lazarus would be raised on the last day (v 24). Jesus responded that he himself is the resurrection and the life, and that those who believe in him will never die, even if they die physically (vv 25-26).<\/p>\n<p>The central emphasis of John’s Gospel, however, does not lie in the anticipated future but in the present experience of that future life. The life of the age to come is already available in Christ to the believer. The metaphors with which Jesus defined his own mission emphasize the present new life: living water that is a spring of water welling up to eternal life (Jn 4:10-14); living bread that satisfies the world’s spiritual hunger (6:35-40); the light of the world who leads his followers into the light of life (8:12); the good shepherd who brings abundant life (10:10); the life giver who raises the dead (11:25); the way, the truth, and the life (14:6); and the genuine vine who sustains those who abide in him (15:5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was very careful to note that the accomplishment of his mission did not rest in his own nature and ability but in the Father who sent him. Jesus’ submission to the Father highlights again the fact that life is a gift of God. Those who believe in the Son of God are recipients of the life that God alone gives—eternal life. Thus the promise of resurrection for all believers, made explicit in Lazarus’s resurrection and guaranteed in Christ’s resurrection as the “firstfruits” (in Pauline terminology, <span>kjv<\/span> 1 Cor 15:23), is the natural consequence of God’s gift (Jn 5:26-29).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus added further content to the concept of eternal life by connecting it with knowing the true God (Jn 17:3). In Greek thought, knowledge referred to the result of either contemplation or mystical ecstasy. In the OT, however, knowledge meant experience, relationship, fellowship, and concern (cf. Jer 31:34). This connotation of knowledge as intimate relationship is underlined by the usage of the verb form to designate sexual relations between male and female (cf. Gn 4:1). Jesus stated, “I am the good shepherd; I know my own and my own know me, as the Father knows me and I know the Father” (Jn 10:14-15, <span>rsv<\/span>). The intimate and mutual relationship of Father and Son is the model for the relationship of the Son and his disciples. This knowledge does not come by education or manipulation of the mind but by revelation through the Son (1:18; cf. 14:7).<\/p>\n<p>A brief survey of the primary elements in the concept of eternal life clearly shows that it is not simply an endless or everlasting life. Although there are no final boundaries to eternal life, the Bible’s primary emphasis is on the quality of life, especially its divine elements. Eternal life is the importation of the qualities of the age to come into the present through the revelation of a faithful God in Christ, and it brings knowledge of God’s relationship with him.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Life; New Creation, New Creature; Regeneration.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ETERNAL LIFE Mode of existence referred to in Scripture characterized by either timelessness or immortality; kind of life attributed to God and distributed to believers. The perspective of the biblical writers flowed from an understanding of a living God who existed prior to the world’s creation and who will continue to exist when the end of time arrives. God’s gift to those who are obedient and responsible to him is designated as “eternal life” or some such synonym. John’s Gospel provides th...","summary_en":"ETERNAL LIFE Mode of existence referred to in Scripture characterized by either timelessness or immortality; kind of life attributed to God and distributed to believers. The perspective of the biblical writers flowed from an understanding of a living God who existed prior to the world’s creation and who will continue to exist when the end of time arrives. God’s gift to those who are obedient and responsible to him is designated as “eternal life” or some such synonym. John’s Gospel provides th...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34233,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Seal","title_en":"Seal","content_ro":"<h3>SEAL<\/h3>\n<p>Small engraved object widely used in the ancient Near East to produce an image in soft clay.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Origin\">Origin<\/p>\n<p>The exact origin of seals cannot be determined. The first seal probably developed from the amulet, whose purpose was to give protection to its wearer or to ward off evil. At one time a seal was believed to have some kind of magical protective power that would bring a curse or harm to the unauthorized person who dared to break it to obtain the contents it protected. Primitive seals were little more than tiny clay spools scratched with twigs to produce simple designs or figures. Glyptic art (the technical name for engraving or carving of seals on gems) flourished in the ancient Near East from the fourth millennium <span>BC<\/span> to the end of the Persian period in the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofSeals\">Types of Seals<\/p>\n<h5>Stamp Seals<\/h5>\n<p>Seals were produced in many shapes and sizes, the earliest being the stamp seal, a flat engraved gem or bead that produced a copy of itself when pressed against soft clay. It was superseded about 3000 <span>BC<\/span> in Mesopotamia by the cylinder seal and began to be used again only at the end of the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>; by Hellenistic times it had replaced the cylinder seal altogether.<\/p>\n<h5>Cylinder Seals<\/h5>\n<p>The cylinder seal first appeared in Mesopotamia before 3000 <span>BC<\/span> and became the most widely used kind of seal until the middle of the first millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Its use in Egypt is evidence of early Mesopotamian cultural influence upon Egypt; however, it was soon replaced there by the scarab (beetle-shaped) seal, which was better adapted for sealing papyrus documents. Symbols or designs were carved on the outside of the cylinder, which left their imprint when the seal was rolled over the wet clay. Some of the earliest symbols used were geometric designs or representations of some magical symbol. Later seals depicted everything from mythology (deities seated conversing with each other, receiving worshipers in audience, riding in a boat or chariot, or fighting an enemy) to scenes from everyday life (hunting, marrying, banqueting, feeding animals, fighting wild beasts, offering sacrifices to the deity, warring, leading prisoners away) and representations of animals, flowers, and birds. Writing (e.g., the owner’s name or a declaration of loyalty to a god or king) began to appear on seals in the third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Because of the great number and variety of seals that have been found, they are invaluable for what they reveal about ancient peoples—how they dressed, their hairstyles, furniture, utensils, and religious beliefs.<\/p>\n<p>Seals were so widely used and have been unearthed in such quantity in the ancient Near East that they can be dated within a century or two of their origin, though sometimes it is difficult to determine the exact period or country of origin. Herodotus observed that every Babylonian gentleman “carries a seal and a walking stick” (Book I, 195). The seal was suspended by a cord about the neck or the wrist or attached to some part of the owner’s clothing (cf. Gn 38:18; 41:42; Sg 8:6; Jer 22:24). Graves have been found with cylinders tied to the wrists of the skeletons.<\/p>\n<p>Another type of seal was the jar handle seal. Cloth was placed over the neck of a bottle, soft clay was smeared on top of the binding cord, and then the seal was pressed into the wet clay. The unbroken seal showed that the merchandise had not been opened before delivery. In Judea the seal was impressed on jar handles as evidence of ownership. Some jar handle stamps were probably trademarks of pottery factories; some bear private names (perhaps the owner of the factory). The so-called royal jar handle stamps contain either a four-winged or two-winged symbol and a short inscription consisting of two lines. The line above reads “belonging to the king,” and the lower line contains the name of a city, probably where the jar was made.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Uses\">Uses<\/p>\n<h5>Functional Uses<\/h5>\n<p>Since their first creation as amulets, seals continued to serve as signals of protection. An unbroken seal proved that the contents had not been tampered with, whether on a document, a granary door, or a wine jar. The lions’ den into which Daniel was cast was sealed with the king’s signet and those of his nobles (Dn 6:17). Jesus’ tomb was secured by sealing the stone (Mt 27:66). The seal also served as a mark of ownership or as a trademark (e.g., placed on pottery before firing). It was also used to validate documents (letters, bills of sale, government documents, etc.). Jezebel wrote letters in her husband’s name and sealed them with his seal, thus bringing about the death of Naboth (1 Kgs 21:8-13). Jeremiah sealed a deed of purchase when he bought a kinsman’s land (Jer 32:10-14). An edict with the Persian king’s seal could not be revoked (Est 8:8).<\/p>\n<h5>Symbolic Use<\/h5>\n<p>Symbolic use of the seal is found both in nonbiblical and biblical literature. A Babylonian prayer says, “Like a seal may my sins be torn away.” The OT says, “Seal the teaching among my disciples” (Is 8:16, <span>rsv<\/span>). Zerubbabel was told he would become God’s signet ring (Hg 2:23). The earth took shape like clay pressed by a signet ring (Jb 38:14).<\/p>\n<p>The word is used symbolically in the NT to designate God’s personal ownership. For example, the Scriptures say that God’s seal is on Jesus, his Son (Jn 3:33; 6:27). This means that Jesus bears God’s personal name; Jesus is God’s personal expression. The Scriptures also say that the Holy Spirit seals the believers (2 Cor 1:22; Eph 1:13; 4:30). This means that the Spirit is God’s mark of ownership on the believers, and it means that the Spirit protects and preserves the believers throughout their lives.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Archaeology and the Bible; Inscriptions.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SEAL<\/h3>\n<p>Small engraved object widely used in the ancient Near East to produce an image in soft clay.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Origin\">Origin<\/p>\n<p>The exact origin of seals cannot be determined. The first seal probably developed from the amulet, whose purpose was to give protection to its wearer or to ward off evil. At one time a seal was believed to have some kind of magical protective power that would bring a curse or harm to the unauthorized person who dared to break it to obtain the contents it protected. Primitive seals were little more than tiny clay spools scratched with twigs to produce simple designs or figures. Glyptic art (the technical name for engraving or carving of seals on gems) flourished in the ancient Near East from the fourth millennium <span>BC<\/span> to the end of the Persian period in the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofSeals\">Types of Seals<\/p>\n<h5>Stamp Seals<\/h5>\n<p>Seals were produced in many shapes and sizes, the earliest being the stamp seal, a flat engraved gem or bead that produced a copy of itself when pressed against soft clay. It was superseded about 3000 <span>BC<\/span> in Mesopotamia by the cylinder seal and began to be used again only at the end of the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>; by Hellenistic times it had replaced the cylinder seal altogether.<\/p>\n<h5>Cylinder Seals<\/h5>\n<p>The cylinder seal first appeared in Mesopotamia before 3000 <span>BC<\/span> and became the most widely used kind of seal until the middle of the first millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Its use in Egypt is evidence of early Mesopotamian cultural influence upon Egypt; however, it was soon replaced there by the scarab (beetle-shaped) seal, which was better adapted for sealing papyrus documents. Symbols or designs were carved on the outside of the cylinder, which left their imprint when the seal was rolled over the wet clay. Some of the earliest symbols used were geometric designs or representations of some magical symbol. Later seals depicted everything from mythology (deities seated conversing with each other, receiving worshipers in audience, riding in a boat or chariot, or fighting an enemy) to scenes from everyday life (hunting, marrying, banqueting, feeding animals, fighting wild beasts, offering sacrifices to the deity, warring, leading prisoners away) and representations of animals, flowers, and birds. Writing (e.g., the owner’s name or a declaration of loyalty to a god or king) began to appear on seals in the third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Because of the great number and variety of seals that have been found, they are invaluable for what they reveal about ancient peoples—how they dressed, their hairstyles, furniture, utensils, and religious beliefs.<\/p>\n<p>Seals were so widely used and have been unearthed in such quantity in the ancient Near East that they can be dated within a century or two of their origin, though sometimes it is difficult to determine the exact period or country of origin. Herodotus observed that every Babylonian gentleman “carries a seal and a walking stick” (Book I, 195). The seal was suspended by a cord about the neck or the wrist or attached to some part of the owner’s clothing (cf. Gn 38:18; 41:42; Sg 8:6; Jer 22:24). Graves have been found with cylinders tied to the wrists of the skeletons.<\/p>\n<p>Another type of seal was the jar handle seal. Cloth was placed over the neck of a bottle, soft clay was smeared on top of the binding cord, and then the seal was pressed into the wet clay. The unbroken seal showed that the merchandise had not been opened before delivery. In Judea the seal was impressed on jar handles as evidence of ownership. Some jar handle stamps were probably trademarks of pottery factories; some bear private names (perhaps the owner of the factory). The so-called royal jar handle stamps contain either a four-winged or two-winged symbol and a short inscription consisting of two lines. The line above reads “belonging to the king,” and the lower line contains the name of a city, probably where the jar was made.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Uses\">Uses<\/p>\n<h5>Functional Uses<\/h5>\n<p>Since their first creation as amulets, seals continued to serve as signals of protection. An unbroken seal proved that the contents had not been tampered with, whether on a document, a granary door, or a wine jar. The lions’ den into which Daniel was cast was sealed with the king’s signet and those of his nobles (Dn 6:17). Jesus’ tomb was secured by sealing the stone (Mt 27:66). The seal also served as a mark of ownership or as a trademark (e.g., placed on pottery before firing). It was also used to validate documents (letters, bills of sale, government documents, etc.). Jezebel wrote letters in her husband’s name and sealed them with his seal, thus bringing about the death of Naboth (1 Kgs 21:8-13). Jeremiah sealed a deed of purchase when he bought a kinsman’s land (Jer 32:10-14). An edict with the Persian king’s seal could not be revoked (Est 8:8).<\/p>\n<h5>Symbolic Use<\/h5>\n<p>Symbolic use of the seal is found both in nonbiblical and biblical literature. A Babylonian prayer says, “Like a seal may my sins be torn away.” The OT says, “Seal the teaching among my disciples” (Is 8:16, <span>rsv<\/span>). Zerubbabel was told he would become God’s signet ring (Hg 2:23). The earth took shape like clay pressed by a signet ring (Jb 38:14).<\/p>\n<p>The word is used symbolically in the NT to designate God’s personal ownership. For example, the Scriptures say that God’s seal is on Jesus, his Son (Jn 3:33; 6:27). This means that Jesus bears God’s personal name; Jesus is God’s personal expression. The Scriptures also say that the Holy Spirit seals the believers (2 Cor 1:22; Eph 1:13; 4:30). This means that the Spirit is God’s mark of ownership on the believers, and it means that the Spirit protects and preserves the believers throughout their lives.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Archaeology and the Bible; Inscriptions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SEAL Small engraved object widely used in the ancient Near East to produce an image in soft clay. Origin The exact origin of seals cannot be determined. The first seal probably developed from the amulet, whose purpose was to give protection to its wearer or to ward off evil. At one time a seal was believed to have some kind of magical protective power that would bring a curse or harm to the unauthorized person who dared to break it to obtain the contents it protected. Primitive seals were lit...","summary_en":"SEAL Small engraved object widely used in the ancient Near East to produce an image in soft clay. Origin The exact origin of seals cannot be determined. The first seal probably developed from the amulet, whose purpose was to give protection to its wearer or to ward off evil. At one time a seal was believed to have some kind of magical protective power that would bring a curse or harm to the unauthorized person who dared to break it to obtain the contents it protected. Primitive seals were lit...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56440,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:27","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:27","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:27<\/strong> Jesus’ most profound gift was not physical bread, but eternal life, which the Father authorized him to give. Physical bread is <em>perishable<\/em><em>;<\/em> the gift of Jesus, who is himself the bread of life (6:35), will last forever.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:27<\/strong> Jesus’ most profound gift was not physical bread, but eternal life, which the Father authorized him to give. Physical bread is <em>perishable<\/em><em>;<\/em> the gift of Jesus, who is himself the bread of life (6:35), will last forever.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:27 Jesus’ most profound gift was not physical bread, but eternal life, which the Father authorized him to give. Physical bread is perishable; the gift of Jesus, who is himself the bread of life (6:35), will last forever.","summary_en":"6:27 Jesus’ most profound gift was not physical bread, but eternal life, which the Father authorized him to give. Physical bread is perishable; the gift of Jesus, who is himself the bread of life (6:35), will last forever.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84066,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:27","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:27","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:27<\/strong> Jesus’ most profound gift was not physical bread, but eternal life, which the Father authorized him to give. Physical bread is <em>perishable<\/em><em>;<\/em> the gift of Jesus, who is himself the bread of life (6:35), will last forever.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:27<\/strong> Jesus’ most profound gift was not physical bread, but eternal life, which the Father authorized him to give. Physical bread is <em>perishable<\/em><em>;<\/em> the gift of Jesus, who is himself the bread of life (6:35), will last forever.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:27 Jesus’ most profound gift was not physical bread, but eternal life, which the Father authorized him to give. Physical bread is perishable; the gift of Jesus, who is himself the bread of life (6:35), will last forever.","summary_en":"6:27 Jesus’ most profound gift was not physical bread, but eternal life, which the Father authorized him to give. Physical bread is perishable; the gift of Jesus, who is himself the bread of life (6:35), will last forever.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111692,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:27","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:27","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:27<\/strong> Jesus’ most profound gift was not physical bread, but eternal life, which the Father authorized him to give. Physical bread is <em>perishable<\/em><em>;<\/em> the gift of Jesus, who is himself the bread of life (6:35), will last forever.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:27<\/strong> Jesus’ most profound gift was not physical bread, but eternal life, which the Father authorized him to give. Physical bread is <em>perishable<\/em><em>;<\/em> the gift of Jesus, who is himself the bread of life (6:35), will last forever.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:27 Jesus’ most profound gift was not physical bread, but eternal life, which the Father authorized him to give. Physical bread is perishable; the gift of Jesus, who is himself the bread of life (6:35), will last forever.","summary_en":"6:27 Jesus’ most profound gift was not physical bread, but eternal life, which the Father authorized him to give. Physical bread is perishable; the gift of Jesus, who is himself the bread of life (6:35), will last forever.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139318,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:27","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:27","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:27<\/strong> Jesus’ most profound gift was not physical bread, but eternal life, which the Father authorized him to give. Physical bread is <em>perishable<\/em><em>;<\/em> the gift of Jesus, who is himself the bread of life (6:35), will last forever.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:27<\/strong> Jesus’ most profound gift was not physical bread, but eternal life, which the Father authorized him to give. Physical bread is <em>perishable<\/em><em>;<\/em> the gift of Jesus, who is himself the bread of life (6:35), will last forever.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:27 Jesus’ most profound gift was not physical bread, but eternal life, which the Father authorized him to give. Physical bread is perishable; the gift of Jesus, who is himself the bread of life (6:35), will last forever.","summary_en":"6:27 Jesus’ most profound gift was not physical bread, but eternal life, which the Father authorized him to give. Physical bread is perishable; the gift of Jesus, who is himself the bread of life (6:35), will last forever.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64986,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92612,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120238,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147864,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"29":[{"id":65870,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","title_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","summary_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93496,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","title_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","summary_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121122,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","title_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","summary_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148748,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","title_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","summary_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"30":[{"id":26412,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Moses","title_en":"Moses","content_ro":"<h3>MOSES<\/h3>\n<p>Great leader of the Hebrew people who brought them out of bondage in Egypt to the Promised Land in Canaan; also the one who gave them the law at Mt Sinai that became the basis for their religious faith through the centuries. Focused in this one person are the figures of prophet, priest, lawgiver, judge, intercessor, shepherd, miracle worker, and founder of a nation.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of his name is uncertain. It has been explained as a Hebrew word meaning “to draw out” (Ex 2:10; cf. 2 Sm 22:17; Ps 18:16). If, however, it is an Egyptian name given him by the daughter of Pharaoh who found him, it is more likely from an Egyptian word for “son” (also found as part of many well-known Egyptian names such as Ahmose, Thutmose, and Ramses). No one else in the OT bears this name.<\/p>\n<p>Without question, the greatest figure in the OT (mentioned by name 767 times), his influence also extends to the pages of the NT (where he is mentioned 79 times). The first 40 years of his life were spent in the household of Pharaoh (Acts 7:23), where he was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians. The next 40 years he spent in Midian as a fugitive from the wrath of Pharaoh, after killing an Egyptian who was mistreating a Hebrew. His last 40 years were devoted to leading the Israelites out of bondage in Egypt to the land God had promised to Abraham and his descendants (Gn 12:1-3). He died at the age of 120 after leading the Israelites successfully through 40 years of wandering in the wilderness to the very edge of the Promised Land on the east side of the Jordan River (Dt 34:7). He is one of the great figures in all of history, a man who took a group of slaves and, under inconceivably difficult circumstances, molded them into a nation that has influenced and altered the entire course of history.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• The First 40 Years—In Egypt<\/p>\n<p>• The Second 40 Years—In Midian<\/p>\n<p>• The Third 40 Years—From Egypt to Canaan<\/p>\n<p>• Moses in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>The only source of information for the life of Moses is the Bible. Archaeology confirms the credibility of the events associated with Moses, but it has never provided any specific confirmation of his existence or work. His story begins with the arrival in Egypt of Jacob, his sons, and their families during a time of famine in Canaan. Invited by Joseph and welcomed by Pharaoh, the family settled down in northeast Egypt in an area known as Goshen, where they remained for 430 years (Ex 12:40). With the passing of time, their numbers grew rapidly, so that the land was filled with them (1:7). A new king arose over Egypt who did not know Joseph. The biblical account does not give the name of this pharaoh, and there has never been agreement as to his identity. He has most frequently been identified as Thutmose III (1504–1451 <span>BC<\/span>), Seti I (1304–1290 <span>BC<\/span>), or Ramses II (1290–1224 <span>BC<\/span>). Out of fear that their growing numbers might become a threat to the security of his nation, Pharaoh determined to take measures to reduce their number. He put them to work building the store cities of Pithom and Rameses, but the severity of the work did not diminish them. He next tried to enlist the cooperation of the midwives to destroy the male babies, but they would not carry out his orders. He then ordered his own people to drown the male infants in the Nile River. Against the background of this first-known Jewish persecution, the baby Moses was born.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFirst40YearsInEgypt\">The First 40 Years—In Egypt<\/p>\n<h5>Birth and Early Life<\/h5>\n<p>A man of the family of Levi named Amram married his father’s sister Jochebed (Ex 6:20; cf. 2:1). Their first son, Aaron, three years older than Moses, was born before the command to drown the Hebrew babies was given, as there is no indication that his life was in danger. However, the cruel order was in force when Moses was born, and after three months, when his mother could no longer hide him, she took a basket made of bulrushes and daubed it with bitumen and pitch. She put the baby into the basket and placed it among the reeds along the banks of the river. An older sister, Miriam, stayed near the river to see what would happen. Soon the daughter of Pharaoh (identified by Josephus as Thermuthis and by others as Hatshepsut, but whose actual identity cannot be determined) came to the river to bathe, as was her custom. She discovered the baby, recognized it as one of the Hebrew children, and determined that she would raise the child as her own. Miriam emerged from her hiding place and offered to secure a Hebrew woman to nurse the child, an arrangement that was agreeable to the princess. Miriam took the baby to his own mother, who kept him for perhaps two or three years (cf. 1 Sm 1:19-24). Nothing is recorded of those formative years. Whether his mother continued seeing him during his later childhood and young manhood or revealed his true identity to him or taught him the Hebrew faith are matters of speculation. Moses was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, as would befit a member of the royal household, and he became mighty in his words and deeds (Acts 7:22).<\/p>\n<h5>Identification with His Own People<\/h5>\n<p>Just when Moses became aware that he was a Hebrew rather than Egyptian cannot be known, but it is clear that he knew it by the time he was 40 years old. One day he went out to visit his people and to observe their treatment, for the cruel measures taken against them by Pharaoh at the time of Moses’ birth had not been lifted. Seeing an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, Moses in great anger killed the Egyptian and buried him. He thought the deed had gone unnoticed until the next day when he encountered two Hebrews fighting with each other. When he tried to act as peacemaker, they both turned on him and accused him of murder: “Who made you a prince and a judge over us? Do you mean to kill me, as you killed the Egyptian?” (Ex 2:14, <span>rsv<\/span>). Acts 7:25 adds: “He supposed that his brethren understood that God was giving them deliverance by his hand” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Aware that being a member of Pharaoh’s household would not exempt him from punishment now that the deed was known, Moses fled for his life to the land of Midian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSecond40YearsInMidian\">The Second 40 Years—In Midian<\/p>\n<h5>Marriage into the Family of Jethro<\/h5>\n<p>Soon after arriving in Midian, Moses sat down by a well, where he observed the seven daughters of the priest of Midian who had come to the well to draw water for their father’s flock. Shepherds came and drove them away, but Moses intervened and helped them water their animals. When Jethro (Ex 3:1; also called Reuel, 2:18; Hobab, Nm 10:29) learned what had happened, he invited Moses to stay with his family and gave him Zipporah as his wife. (There is some disagreement among scholars regarding the identity of Hobab in Numbers 10:29; some think he was Moses’ father-in-law, while others maintain that Hobab was Moses’ brother-in-law. <em>See also<\/em> Hobab). Two children, Gershom (Ex 2:22) and Eliezer (18:4), were born to Moses and Zipporah during the years in Midian. Forty years passed, and Moses’ thoughts about his former life in Egypt must have faded into the past. He could not have foreseen that God would soon thrust him back into the midst of the court in Egypt, where he would confront the son of the now-dead pharaoh with the demand to release the Hebrew people from the bondage they had endured for so many years. God had not forgotten his people and was now ready to deliver them.<\/p>\n<h5>Encounter with God at the Burning Bush<\/h5>\n<p>One day, while Moses was taking care of the flocks of his father-in-law, he led them to Mt Horeb (known also as Sinai), where God appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush that burned but was not consumed. Moses approached to observe the strange sight more closely and heard God speak to him out of the bush, “Moses, Moses!” Moses replied, “Here am I.” Before he could come any nearer to the bush, God said, “Do not come near; put off your shoes from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground” (Ex 3:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). He further identified himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He assured Moses that he was aware of the cruel afflictions of his people and had heard their cries. Then he told of his plan to send Moses to Egypt to deliver his people from their bondage.<\/p>\n<p>Faced with a challenge that seemed beyond his capabilities, the aged Moses began making excuses for not accepting the task. God assured Moses that he would be with him (Ex 3:11-12). To his excuse that he would not be able to give an answer if the people asked him the name of the God he represented, God revealed his name in the cryptic statement, “ ‘<span>I Am the One Who Always Is<\/span>’ . . . Just tell them, ‘I <span>Am<\/span> has sent me to you’ ” (vv 13-14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Many interpretations have been proposed for the name. Whatever else it means, it undoubtedly suggests the self-existence and all-sufficiency of God. Moses then argued that the people would not believe him when he told them that God had sent him to deliver them from Egypt. In response God gave him three signs: When he cast his shepherd’s rod to the ground, it became a serpent. When he put his hand to his bosom, it became leprous. He was also told that when he would pour water from the Nile on the ground, it would become blood (Ex 4:1-9). Even armed with these powerful evidences of the presence of God with him, Moses raised still another objection, “O Lord, I’m just not a good speaker. I never have been, and I’m not now, even after you have spoken to me. I’m clumsy with words” (v 10, <span>nlt<\/span>). God told him that he would teach him what to say, but despite such assurance, Moses asked God to send someone else. In anger mingled with compassion, God made Moses’ brother, Aaron, the spokesman, but said his instructions would still be given directly to Moses.<\/p>\n<h5>Return to Egypt<\/h5>\n<p>Moses took his wife and sons and set out for Egypt, telling his father-in-law only that he wanted to go back to Egypt to visit his kinsmen there (Ex 4:18). The biblical account says he put his wife and sons on the same donkey to journey back to Egypt (v 20). The fact that all three rode the same animal indicates that both children were quite young and had not been born in the early years of Moses’ marriage. At a lodging place along the way a strange thing happened. The Lord met him and sought to kill him (v 24), apparently because Moses had failed to circumcise the baby before leaving Midian. When Zipporah realized that Moses’ life was in danger, she performed the rite herself and said to her husband, “What a blood-smeared bridegroom you are to me!” (v 25, <span>nlt<\/span>). Whatever else may have been involved in this unusual encounter with God, it was a solemn reminder that the one who was to be the leader of the covenant people must not himself neglect any part of the covenant (Gn 17:10-14).<\/p>\n<p>God told Aaron (who was still in Egypt) to go to the mountain where Moses had encountered God at the burning bush and meet his brother there. Moses told Aaron everything that had happened, and together they went to Egypt, gathered the elders together, and informed them of these matters. When Moses and Aaron performed the signs in the presence of the people, they believed these leaders had been sent by God to deliver them from their affliction (Ex 4:30-31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheThird40YearsFromEgypttoCanaan\">The Third 40 Years—From Egypt to Canaan<\/p>\n<h5>The Encounter with Pharaoh<\/h5>\n<p>Soon after his return to Egypt, Moses, accompanied by Aaron, went to Pharaoh and repeated the demands of the Lord, “Let my people go, for they must go out into the wilderness to hold a religious festival in my honor” (Ex 5:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). Pharaoh rejected the demand with the observation that he had never heard of this God of Moses. When one realizes that Egyptian kings considered themselves to be gods, the affront to Pharaoh becomes even more acute. Not only did he reject Moses’ demands, but he intensified the burdens of the Hebrews. Their work had up until then required them to make brick using straw provided for them, but now Pharaoh said they would have to gather their own straw and still produce the same number of bricks. The Hebrews turned in anguish and anger to Moses and blamed him for making them offensive in the sight of Pharaoh. Even Moses could not understand the turn of events and complained bitterly to God. God reassured Moses that he would deliver the Hebrews from their bondage, and moreover, he would bring them into the land he had promised Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He then instructed Moses to return to Pharaoh and repeat the demand to release the Hebrews upon threat of severe reprisal if the demand were ignored.<\/p>\n<p>Ushered again into Pharaoh’s presence, Moses repeated his request for release of the Israelites. He attempted to impress Pharaoh by turning his rod into a serpent, but the Egyptian wise men, through their secret arts, were able to duplicate the miracle, so Pharaoh’s heart remained hardened and he would not listen to Moses. In rapid succession Moses brought nine plagues upon the land of Egypt to show the omnipotence of God to force the compliance of Pharaoh. These included a plague in which the water of the Nile turned to blood, a plague of frogs, one of gnats, then of flies, a plague on the livestock, boils on the people, plagues of hail, locusts, and complete darkness. During the plagues of the frogs, flies, hail, locusts, and darkness, Pharaoh was distraught and would temporarily relent and agree to Moses’ demands, but as soon as the plague was lifted, his heart hardened and he would retract his promise. The outcome of the first nine plagues was terrible devastation of the land of Egypt, but the Israelites were not released. There was yet one more plague in store, the most terrible of all.<\/p>\n<h5>The First Passover<\/h5>\n<p>God told Moses that there remained one more plague in store for the Egyptians: “All the firstborn sons will die in every family in Egypt, from the oldest son of Pharaoh, who sits on the throne, to the oldest son of his lowliest slave. Even the firstborn of the animals will die” (Ex 11:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). Furthermore, he assured Moses that the plague would not touch a single household of the Hebrews, “Then you will know that the <span>Lord<\/span> makes a distinction between the Egyptians and the Israelites” (v 7, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>God instructed the people through Moses and Aaron to make their preparations for leaving the land in haste. They were to go to the Egyptians and ask them for their jewels of silver and gold (Ex 11:2-3), a request to which the Egyptians agreed, perhaps out of fear of the Hebrews and in the belief that the gifts would bring about an end of the terrors that had struck the land. The Hebrews were also instructed to prepare a lamb for each family—small families could share—for the last meal to be eaten in the land of Egypt (a rite that became the pattern for the Jewish observance of the Passover for many centuries). Blood of the lamb was to be put on the doorposts and lintels of the houses in which the Passover meal was being eaten that night. The Hebrews were promised that wherever the blood was on the door, no harm would come to that household. They were also instructed to prepare unleavened bread. At midnight the death angel of the Lord killed all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh himself to the lowest captive in a dungeon; not a single house of the Egyptians escaped tragedy. When Pharaoh saw what had happened, he ordered Moses and the people to leave the land at once (12:31-32). The biblical record says that about 600,000 Hebrew men left Egypt. Together with women and children, the total would have been in excess of 2 million people.<\/p>\n<h5>The Exodus from Egypt<\/h5>\n<p>The exodus is the central event of the OT and marks the birth of Israel as a nation. The Jewish people still look back to that event as the great redemptive act of God in history on behalf of his people, much as Christians look upon the cross as the great redemptive act of their faith.<\/p>\n\n<p>The exact route taken by the Hebrews out of Egypt cannot be determined today, though many possibilities have been proposed. They did not take the shortest, most direct route to Canaan (which would have been about a 10 days’ journey along the Mediterranean coastline), but set out in the direction of Mt Sinai, where Moses had earlier met God at the burning bush. As a sign that Moses had been sent to deliver the people, God told Moses he would bring them to that same spot, where they would worship God (Ex 3:12). The Hebrews did not forget the request of Joseph to carry his bones with them when they returned to their own land (Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19).<\/p>\n<p>As the people journeyed, they were preceded by a pillar of cloud during the day and a pillar of fire at night. The cloud represented the presence of God with his people and guided them along the route they should travel.<\/p>\n<p>Back in Egypt, Pharaoh was having second thoughts about letting the Hebrews leave the land and decided to pursue them with his army and bring them back. When the Hebrews saw the approaching cloud of dust and realized that the Egyptian army was pursuing them, they were terrified. The sea lay ahead of them and the Egyptians were behind; there seemed to be no way of escape. The people turned on Moses, blaming him for bringing them out of Egypt. God again assured them that they did not need to be afraid or do anything to defend themselves. He promised to fight the battle for them and give them victory (Ex 14:14).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord parted the water of the Sea of Reeds (traditionally but erroneously referred to as the Red Sea) by a strong east wind and allowed the Israelites to pass through the sea on dry ground to the other side. The Egyptians rushed after the Israelites, following them into the dry bed of the sea. But before they reached the other side, the waters rushed back together, destroying the Egyptian army in the midst of the sea and leaving the Israelites safe on the other side. The people celebrated their great deliverance in song (Ex 15) and then continued their journey. The narrative that follows describes the struggle of the Israelites to survive in the desert—problems of food and water, internal dissension, murmurings against Moses, and battles with enemies. Through all their experiences, Moses towers as the unifying force and great spiritual leader.<\/p>\n<p>In spite of having seen God’s great act of deliverance so recently, the faith of the Israelites was not strong. Three days later they came to a place where the water was not fit to drink, and they began complaining against Moses. The Lord showed Moses how to purify the water, and the people’s needs were satisfied (Ex 15:22-25). When they reached the wilderness of Sin, they complained again, this time because of lack of food. God met their need by supplying manna, a breadlike substance that would serve as their food until they came to Canaan (16:1-21). Later, camped at Rephidim, the people complained again, this time for lack of water. Once again God met their needs by supplying water from the rock at Horeb (17:1-7). The Amalekites attacked them while they were still camped at Rephidim, but God gave a great victory to the Israelites (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Moses and the people reached Sinai and camped there. Jethro came to visit, bringing Moses’ wife and sons. Zipporah had apparently decided to return with her children to stay with her father rather than to go on to Egypt with Moses. It was a joyful reunion, and Jethro made a burnt offering and sacrifices to God (an act that has evoked the suggestion that Jethro was a true worshiper of God, though nothing is known of his links to the Hebrew faith). When Jethro observed Moses trying to settle all the disputes and problems of the Hebrews unaided, he proposed that Moses delegate responsibility for some of the lesser matters to able men chosen from among the people. Moses accepted the suggestion, and shortly afterward Jethro returned to his own land. He did not remain at Sinai to participate in the ratification of the covenant (Ex 18:13-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Giving of the Law at Sinai<\/h5>\n<p>God had kept his promises to Moses. He had delivered the Hebrews from their Egyptian bondage and brought them to the very place where he had commissioned Moses to be their leader. He was now ready to enter into a covenant relationship with Israel. Amid a spectacular and terrifying scene of lightning, thunder, thick clouds, fire, smoke, and earthquake, God descended to the top of Sinai and called Moses to come up the mountain, where he remained 40 days to receive the law that would become the basis of the covenant.<\/p>\n<p>At Sinai, God was revealed as the God who demands exclusive allegiance in all areas of life and, at the same time, as the God who desires personal fellowship with his people.<\/p>\n<h5>Apostasy of the People<\/h5>\n<p>While Moses tarried on Mt Sinai, the people below became impatient and skeptical about his return, so they went to Aaron and asked him to make idols for them to worship. They contributed the gold earrings they were wearing. “Then Aaron took the gold, melted it down, and molded and tooled it into the shape of a calf. The people exclaimed, ‘O Israel, these are the gods who brought you out of Egypt!’ ” (Ex 32:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). The next day they joined in the worship of the idol with sacrifices and revelry. God told Moses what was taking place below and angrily declared that he was going to destroy the people but would make a great nation of Moses and his descendants. Moses immediately interceded on behalf of the people, and God’s wrath abated. Moses descended the mountain, carrying the two tablets of stone on which the law had been written, but when he entered the camp and saw what was taking place, he could not restrain his anger. He threw the stone tablets to the ground, ground the golden calf to powder, mixed it with water, and forced the people to drink it. He turned angrily to Aaron and demanded an explanation for the great sin that had been committed. Aaron lamely tried to shift the blame by minimizing his own role: “I threw them [the gold] into the fire—and out came this calf!” (v 24, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses called for volunteers to carry out God’s judgment on the people for the great sin they had committed. Men of the tribe of Levi responded and executed about 3,000 men. Later they were commended and rewarded (Dt 33:9-10). Moses again interceded for the people, requesting that he be destroyed with the rest if God could not forgive them. God relented and promised Moses that the angel of the Lord would go with them still (Ex 32:34).<\/p>\n<p>Then Moses made a special request that he might be allowed to see the glory of the Lord. God instructed Moses to hew out two more tablets of stone like the ones he had destroyed and to return to the top of the mountain the next day. There the Lord passed before him and proclaimed his name: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, the merciful and gracious God. I am slow to anger and rich in unfailing love and faithfulness” (Ex 34:6, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses remained on the mountain another 40 days, where he received renewed warnings against idolatry and further instructions from the Lord, together with another copy of the Ten Commandments on tablets of stone. When Moses came down from the mountain, he was not aware that the skin of his face shone as a result of talking with God. At first the people were afraid to come near him, but he called them together and repeated all the Lord had said to him on the mountain. Afterward, he covered his face with a veil, which he removed only when he went into the presence of the Lord. Paul said the purpose of the veil was to prevent the people from seeing the heavenly light gradually fade from Moses’ face (2 Cor 3:13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Tabernacle and Establishment of the Priesthood<\/h5>\n<p>When Moses went up to the mountain the first time to receive the law from God, he was instructed to collect materials to be used in the construction of the tabernacle or tent. Gold, silver, bronze, blue and purple and scarlet yarn, fine twined linen, goats’ hair, tanned rams’ skins, goatskins, and acacia wood would be needed, along with oil for the lamps, spices for the anointing oil and for the fragrant incense, onyx stones, and stones for setting (Ex 25:3-7). The pattern for construction was also given to him, together with the ritual to be used for the consecration of the priests. A man named Bezalel was put in charge of the construction of the tabernacle, assisted by Oholiab (31:1-6). The tabernacle was portable like a tent so that it could be taken down and moved from place to place as the Hebrews continued their journey toward Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to giving Moses directions for the tabernacle, God also instructed him concerning the sacrifices that were to be brought: the burnt offering, grain offering, peace offering, sin offering, and guilt offering (Lv 1–7). The solemn ceremony for ordaining Aaron and his sons as priests and for inaugurating the worship practices were to be performed by Moses (chs 8–9).<\/p>\n<p>Sometime after this solemn inauguration of the religious ritual actually took place, Nadab and Abihu, two of Aaron’s four sons, offered unauthorized fire before the Lord. A fire came out from the Lord and destroyed them. Moses forbade Aaron and his sons Eleazar and Ithamar to express grief because of the sinfulness of the act (Lv 10:1-7). The nature of their sin is difficult to determine, but it surely involved a violation of God’s holiness. Therefore, it is appropriate that a large part of the remainder of the book of Leviticus gives regulations that stress the holy living that God expected from his people.<\/p>\n<h5>From Sinai to Kadesh<\/h5>\n<p>A year had elapsed from the time the Israelites left Egypt until the census was taken (Nm 9:1). God reminded the people that it was time to observe the Passover, which they did, and a month later they set out from Sinai and came to the wilderness of Paran. Along the way they complained about the unvarying diet of manna and they longed for the fish, cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions, and garlic they had eaten in Egypt (11:4-6). In anger God sent quail in abundance, but even while the people were devouring the meat, God sent a great plague that killed many Israelites. The complaining attitude of the people was shared even by Miriam and Aaron. They began to speak against the Cushite woman Moses had married (12:1-2). It is not certain whether the Cushite was an Ethiopian or whether this was another way of referring to Zipporah. If Moses did marry a second time, no mention is made of it elsewhere in the OT. Moses made no reply to the accusations of his brother and sister. It was not necessary, for God intervened in defense of his servant. He smote Miriam with leprosy for her part in speaking against Moses, and when Aaron saw what had happened to Miriam, he acknowledged that they both had sinned. Miriam’s leprosy was removed in response to Moses’ fervent intercession.<\/p>\n\n<p>While the people were encamped at Kadesh (also called Kadesh-barnea—Nm 32:8) in the wilderness of Paran, Moses sent 12 men into Canaan, one from each tribe, to spy out the land in preparation for the Israelite entry. After 40 days the spies returned and, though they acknowledged that the land was fertile and inviting, 10 of them were afraid of the Canaanite inhabitants and advised against going into the land. Only Joshua and Caleb were willing to go ahead and occupy the territory. The entire congregation joined the protest against going in and determined to choose a new leader and return to Egypt rather than risk death by the sword in Canaan. They threatened to stone Moses and Aaron. At that moment God intervened and would have destroyed all the people on the spot except for the intervention of Moses (13:1–14:19). He declared that, if God did not bring the people into Canaan, the nations round about would conclude that the God of the Israelites was unable to bring them into the land. Once again God acquiesced to Moses’ request to pardon the people but said that none of them 20 years and older who had complained against him would be allowed to enter the land. All the people would wander in the wilderness for 40 years until that generation died, and then their children would be allowed to enter Canaan (14:29-33). When they heard the Lord’s sentence upon them, the people quickly decided to lift the sentence of judgment by entering the land at once, but God was not with them, and they suffered a disastrous defeat at the hands of the Amalekites and Canaanites.<\/p>\n<h5>Forty Years in the Wilderness<\/h5>\n<p>Very little is known about events during the 40 years of wilderness wanderings. In spite of the judgment that had already come upon them, the people did not seem to change their ways. A man named Korah led another rebellion against the authority of Moses and Aaron. God would not listen to the pleas of Moses and Aaron on behalf of these dissidents (Nm 16:22-24), but told the congregation to separate itself from the tents of Korah and his conspirators. While the people watched, the ground split open and swallowed up the rebellious factions together with their households and all their possessions. Though the rest of the Israelites witnessed the fate of the rebels, it did not deter them from again turning on Moses and Aaron. At this, God told Moses to remove himself from the murmuring congregation in order that he could take vengeance. Though Moses offered atonement for the people’s sins, 14,700 died by plague before the punishment was ended. To demonstrate further to the people that Moses was his chosen leader, the Lord instructed Moses to take rods, one for each tribe, and to deposit them in the tent of meeting. God would cause the rod of the man chosen by him to sprout, and so silence the murmurings of the people. The rod belonging to Aaron sprouted and budded and bloomed, but the people only complained more.<\/p>\n<p>As the people neared the end of their years of wilderness wanderings, Miriam died in Kadesh and was buried there (Nm 20:1). Soon after, the people began to complain once more for lack of water. God instructed Moses to speak to a rock that would bring forth water to satisfy the needs of the people. Instead of speaking to the rock, Moses struck it twice with his rod. The water came forth, but God rebuked Moses and Aaron: “Because you did not trust me enough to demonstrate my holiness to the people of Israel, you will not lead them into the land I am giving them!” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). The nature of the sin is not clear, but Moses and Aaron were apparently taking to themselves honor that belonged to God alone. Because of the sin, they were denied the privilege of leading the Israelites into the Promised Land. The punishment may seem too severe for the sin, but it shows that the privileged role of leadership given to Moses and Aaron carried with it an unusual measure of responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>The people then journeyed from Kadesh to Mt Hor on the border of the land of Edom, where Aaron died. Moses took his priestly garments from him and gave them to Eleazar, his son, thereby transferring the priestly office (Nm 20:28).<\/p>\n<p>As the people came closer to their destination, resistance on the part of the native population increased. There was a skirmish with the king of Arad and his forces at Hormah, resulting in a victory for Israel (Nm 21:1-3). As they journeyed around Edom, some of the Israelites began speaking against God and Moses because there was no food or water and they were tired of eating manna. This time the Lord sent poisonous snakes among the people, and many of them died of the venomous bites. Those who had not yet been bitten came to Moses, acknowledged their sin, and asked that the serpents be removed from their midst. God instructed Moses to make a serpent of bronze and set it on a pole. If a person bitten by a serpent looked up at the bronze serpent, he or she would live.<\/p>\n<p>As the Israelites approached the territory of Sihon, king of the Amorites, they sent messengers asking permission to pass peaceably through his land. Instead of granting the request, Sihon gathered his army together and fought against Israel. He was killed in the battle, and his land and cities were taken and occupied by the Hebrews (Nm 21:21-25).<\/p>\n<h5>Arrival at the Jordan River<\/h5>\n<p>After their victory over Sihon, the Israelites set out again and encamped in the plains of Moab on the east side of the Jordan River facing Jericho, in full view of the Promised Land. The Moabites were terrified by the presence of these people because they had heard what happened to the Amorites. Their king, Balak, hired a magician named Balaam to curse the Israelites. Three times Balaam attempted to curse them, but each time God turned his words into a blessing (Nm 22–24). Though unable to curse the Israelites, Balaam was responsible for an even greater calamity. He advised the Moabites to entice the Israelites to sacrifice to their gods and bow down to them (Nm 25:1-3; 31:16; 2 Pt 2:15; Rv 2:14). While the people were worshiping the Moabite deity, Baal of Peor, God’s anger was kindled against them, and he sent a plague that killed 24,000 of them (Nm 25:9). It was Israel’s first encounter with the seductive allurement of licentious idolatry and an ominous foreview of what would happen after they settled down in Canaan. Their continued attraction to idolatry would be their final undoing.<\/p>\n<p>After the plague, God instructed Moses and Eleazar to take another census of the people like the one almost 40 years earlier. A whole generation of Israelites had died in the wilderness, but they had been replaced by an almost equal number, so that now there were 601,730 men 20 years and older who were able to go to war (Nm 26:51). Not a man remained of those who had been counted in the first census, except Caleb and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord instructed Moses to lay hands on Joshua and commission him as the new leader in the sight of Eleazar the priest and all the congregation (Nm 27:12-23). In addition, the Lord gave Moses instructions concerning feasts and offerings and vows (chs 28–30). God ordered Moses, as his last act as leader, to avenge the Israelites on the Midianites. In that battle the armies of Israel gained a great victory over the Midianites, killing their kings, their men, and also Balaam.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord gave instructions to Moses concerning the boundaries that would mark the Promised Land and named the men who would divide the land among the tribes (Nm 34). He also ordered that 48 cities be given to the Levites, the priestly tribe, as their portion. Six of these were designated as cities of refuge where murderers could flee so that they would not be killed by those seeking vengeance without having an opportunity to stand before the congregation for judgment (ch 35).<\/p>\n<h5>Moses’ Death<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy has often been called Moses’ valedictory speech to the people, for in it Moses is not merely the chief speaker but the only speaker. With the congregation of his people gathered before him, he rehearsed all that God had done for them since leaving Sinai, and he reminded them of their failure to enter the Promised Land 38 years earlier (Dt 2:14). He recalled his plea that God would let him cross the Jordan and see the land that was to be the home of the people, but God responded that Moses would only be allowed to view the land from the top of Pisgah. Moses then exhorted the people to obey the statutes and ordinances that had been given to them in order to experience God’s blessings in the land.<\/p>\n\n<p>As the day of Moses’ death approached, the Lord ordered Moses and Joshua to present themselves at the tent of meeting in order for Joshua to be commissioned as the new leader (Dt 31:14-23). Before his death, Moses pronounced a blessing upon all the Israelites (ch 33). Having completed these tasks, Moses went up from the plains of Moab to Mt Nebo, and to the top of Pisgah. From there God showed him the land promised long ago to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—the land that was soon to be the home of the wandering Israelite tribes. Again God told him that he would not be allowed to cross over the Jordan. Moses died there and God buried him somewhere in the valley in the land of Moab opposite Beth-peor (34:6). Moses was 120 years old when he died, and the Israelites mourned his death for 30 days. The finest tribute to Moses is found in the closing words of the book of Deuteronomy, “There has never been another prophet like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (v 10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MosesintheNewTestament\">Moses in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>All Jews and Christians in apostolic times considered Moses the author of the Pentateuch. Such expressions as “the law of Moses” (Lk 2:22), “Moses commanded” (Mt 19:7), “Moses said” (Mk 7:10) “and Moses wrote” (12:19) shows that his name was synonymous with the OT books attributed to him. He is mentioned in the NT more than any other OT figure, a total of 79 times. His role as lawgiver is emphasized more than any other aspect of his life (Mt 8:4; Mk 7:10; Jn 1:17; Acts 15:1). He appears at the transfiguration of Jesus as the representative of OT law, along with Elijah as the representative of OT prophets (Mt 17:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses’ role as prophet is also mentioned in the NT. As a prophet, he spoke of the coming Messiah and his sufferings (Lk 24:25-27; Acts 3:22). The NT also draws from the life and experiences of Moses to show patterns of life under the new covenant. The nativity story of Jesus parallels the Mosaic story of the infant deliverer being rescued from the evil designs of an earthly despot (Mt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount parallels the giving of the law at Sinai (Mt 5–7) and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of the will of God. Contrast between the old law and the new relationship with God is especially marked in the book of Galatians. The comparison of Moses with Christ is an important emphasis of the book of Hebrews (Heb 3:5-6; 9:11-22). John contrasted the law that was given through Moses with the grace and truth that came through Jesus Christ (Jn 1:17). He also contrasted the manna in the wilderness to Jesus as “the bread of life” (6:30-35).<\/p>\n<p>Other references to Moses or to events associated with him include his birth (Acts 7:20; Heb 11:23), the burning bush (Lk 20:37), the magicians of Egypt (2 Tm 3:8), the Passover (Heb 11:28), the exodus (3:16), crossing of the sea (1 Cor 10:2), the covenant sacrifice at Sinai (Mt 26:28), the manna (1 Cor 10:3), the glory on Moses’ face (2 Cor 3:7-18), water from the rock (1 Cor 10:4), the bronze serpent (Jn 3:14), and the song of Moses (Rv 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Egypt, Egyptian; Exodus, The; Israel, History of; Plagues upon Egypt; Priests and Levites; Tabernacle; Temple; Commandments, The Ten; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MOSES<\/h3>\n<p>Great leader of the Hebrew people who brought them out of bondage in Egypt to the Promised Land in Canaan; also the one who gave them the law at Mt Sinai that became the basis for their religious faith through the centuries. Focused in this one person are the figures of prophet, priest, lawgiver, judge, intercessor, shepherd, miracle worker, and founder of a nation.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of his name is uncertain. It has been explained as a Hebrew word meaning “to draw out” (Ex 2:10; cf. 2 Sm 22:17; Ps 18:16). If, however, it is an Egyptian name given him by the daughter of Pharaoh who found him, it is more likely from an Egyptian word for “son” (also found as part of many well-known Egyptian names such as Ahmose, Thutmose, and Ramses). No one else in the OT bears this name.<\/p>\n<p>Without question, the greatest figure in the OT (mentioned by name 767 times), his influence also extends to the pages of the NT (where he is mentioned 79 times). The first 40 years of his life were spent in the household of Pharaoh (Acts 7:23), where he was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians. The next 40 years he spent in Midian as a fugitive from the wrath of Pharaoh, after killing an Egyptian who was mistreating a Hebrew. His last 40 years were devoted to leading the Israelites out of bondage in Egypt to the land God had promised to Abraham and his descendants (Gn 12:1-3). He died at the age of 120 after leading the Israelites successfully through 40 years of wandering in the wilderness to the very edge of the Promised Land on the east side of the Jordan River (Dt 34:7). He is one of the great figures in all of history, a man who took a group of slaves and, under inconceivably difficult circumstances, molded them into a nation that has influenced and altered the entire course of history.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• The First 40 Years—In Egypt<\/p>\n<p>• The Second 40 Years—In Midian<\/p>\n<p>• The Third 40 Years—From Egypt to Canaan<\/p>\n<p>• Moses in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>The only source of information for the life of Moses is the Bible. Archaeology confirms the credibility of the events associated with Moses, but it has never provided any specific confirmation of his existence or work. His story begins with the arrival in Egypt of Jacob, his sons, and their families during a time of famine in Canaan. Invited by Joseph and welcomed by Pharaoh, the family settled down in northeast Egypt in an area known as Goshen, where they remained for 430 years (Ex 12:40). With the passing of time, their numbers grew rapidly, so that the land was filled with them (1:7). A new king arose over Egypt who did not know Joseph. The biblical account does not give the name of this pharaoh, and there has never been agreement as to his identity. He has most frequently been identified as Thutmose III (1504–1451 <span>BC<\/span>), Seti I (1304–1290 <span>BC<\/span>), or Ramses II (1290–1224 <span>BC<\/span>). Out of fear that their growing numbers might become a threat to the security of his nation, Pharaoh determined to take measures to reduce their number. He put them to work building the store cities of Pithom and Rameses, but the severity of the work did not diminish them. He next tried to enlist the cooperation of the midwives to destroy the male babies, but they would not carry out his orders. He then ordered his own people to drown the male infants in the Nile River. Against the background of this first-known Jewish persecution, the baby Moses was born.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFirst40YearsInEgypt\">The First 40 Years—In Egypt<\/p>\n<h5>Birth and Early Life<\/h5>\n<p>A man of the family of Levi named Amram married his father’s sister Jochebed (Ex 6:20; cf. 2:1). Their first son, Aaron, three years older than Moses, was born before the command to drown the Hebrew babies was given, as there is no indication that his life was in danger. However, the cruel order was in force when Moses was born, and after three months, when his mother could no longer hide him, she took a basket made of bulrushes and daubed it with bitumen and pitch. She put the baby into the basket and placed it among the reeds along the banks of the river. An older sister, Miriam, stayed near the river to see what would happen. Soon the daughter of Pharaoh (identified by Josephus as Thermuthis and by others as Hatshepsut, but whose actual identity cannot be determined) came to the river to bathe, as was her custom. She discovered the baby, recognized it as one of the Hebrew children, and determined that she would raise the child as her own. Miriam emerged from her hiding place and offered to secure a Hebrew woman to nurse the child, an arrangement that was agreeable to the princess. Miriam took the baby to his own mother, who kept him for perhaps two or three years (cf. 1 Sm 1:19-24). Nothing is recorded of those formative years. Whether his mother continued seeing him during his later childhood and young manhood or revealed his true identity to him or taught him the Hebrew faith are matters of speculation. Moses was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, as would befit a member of the royal household, and he became mighty in his words and deeds (Acts 7:22).<\/p>\n<h5>Identification with His Own People<\/h5>\n<p>Just when Moses became aware that he was a Hebrew rather than Egyptian cannot be known, but it is clear that he knew it by the time he was 40 years old. One day he went out to visit his people and to observe their treatment, for the cruel measures taken against them by Pharaoh at the time of Moses’ birth had not been lifted. Seeing an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, Moses in great anger killed the Egyptian and buried him. He thought the deed had gone unnoticed until the next day when he encountered two Hebrews fighting with each other. When he tried to act as peacemaker, they both turned on him and accused him of murder: “Who made you a prince and a judge over us? Do you mean to kill me, as you killed the Egyptian?” (Ex 2:14, <span>rsv<\/span>). Acts 7:25 adds: “He supposed that his brethren understood that God was giving them deliverance by his hand” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Aware that being a member of Pharaoh’s household would not exempt him from punishment now that the deed was known, Moses fled for his life to the land of Midian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSecond40YearsInMidian\">The Second 40 Years—In Midian<\/p>\n<h5>Marriage into the Family of Jethro<\/h5>\n<p>Soon after arriving in Midian, Moses sat down by a well, where he observed the seven daughters of the priest of Midian who had come to the well to draw water for their father’s flock. Shepherds came and drove them away, but Moses intervened and helped them water their animals. When Jethro (Ex 3:1; also called Reuel, 2:18; Hobab, Nm 10:29) learned what had happened, he invited Moses to stay with his family and gave him Zipporah as his wife. (There is some disagreement among scholars regarding the identity of Hobab in Numbers 10:29; some think he was Moses’ father-in-law, while others maintain that Hobab was Moses’ brother-in-law. <em>See also<\/em> Hobab). Two children, Gershom (Ex 2:22) and Eliezer (18:4), were born to Moses and Zipporah during the years in Midian. Forty years passed, and Moses’ thoughts about his former life in Egypt must have faded into the past. He could not have foreseen that God would soon thrust him back into the midst of the court in Egypt, where he would confront the son of the now-dead pharaoh with the demand to release the Hebrew people from the bondage they had endured for so many years. God had not forgotten his people and was now ready to deliver them.<\/p>\n<h5>Encounter with God at the Burning Bush<\/h5>\n<p>One day, while Moses was taking care of the flocks of his father-in-law, he led them to Mt Horeb (known also as Sinai), where God appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush that burned but was not consumed. Moses approached to observe the strange sight more closely and heard God speak to him out of the bush, “Moses, Moses!” Moses replied, “Here am I.” Before he could come any nearer to the bush, God said, “Do not come near; put off your shoes from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground” (Ex 3:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). He further identified himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He assured Moses that he was aware of the cruel afflictions of his people and had heard their cries. Then he told of his plan to send Moses to Egypt to deliver his people from their bondage.<\/p>\n<p>Faced with a challenge that seemed beyond his capabilities, the aged Moses began making excuses for not accepting the task. God assured Moses that he would be with him (Ex 3:11-12). To his excuse that he would not be able to give an answer if the people asked him the name of the God he represented, God revealed his name in the cryptic statement, “ ‘<span>I Am the One Who Always Is<\/span>’ . . . Just tell them, ‘I <span>Am<\/span> has sent me to you’ ” (vv 13-14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Many interpretations have been proposed for the name. Whatever else it means, it undoubtedly suggests the self-existence and all-sufficiency of God. Moses then argued that the people would not believe him when he told them that God had sent him to deliver them from Egypt. In response God gave him three signs: When he cast his shepherd’s rod to the ground, it became a serpent. When he put his hand to his bosom, it became leprous. He was also told that when he would pour water from the Nile on the ground, it would become blood (Ex 4:1-9). Even armed with these powerful evidences of the presence of God with him, Moses raised still another objection, “O Lord, I’m just not a good speaker. I never have been, and I’m not now, even after you have spoken to me. I’m clumsy with words” (v 10, <span>nlt<\/span>). God told him that he would teach him what to say, but despite such assurance, Moses asked God to send someone else. In anger mingled with compassion, God made Moses’ brother, Aaron, the spokesman, but said his instructions would still be given directly to Moses.<\/p>\n<h5>Return to Egypt<\/h5>\n<p>Moses took his wife and sons and set out for Egypt, telling his father-in-law only that he wanted to go back to Egypt to visit his kinsmen there (Ex 4:18). The biblical account says he put his wife and sons on the same donkey to journey back to Egypt (v 20). The fact that all three rode the same animal indicates that both children were quite young and had not been born in the early years of Moses’ marriage. At a lodging place along the way a strange thing happened. The Lord met him and sought to kill him (v 24), apparently because Moses had failed to circumcise the baby before leaving Midian. When Zipporah realized that Moses’ life was in danger, she performed the rite herself and said to her husband, “What a blood-smeared bridegroom you are to me!” (v 25, <span>nlt<\/span>). Whatever else may have been involved in this unusual encounter with God, it was a solemn reminder that the one who was to be the leader of the covenant people must not himself neglect any part of the covenant (Gn 17:10-14).<\/p>\n<p>God told Aaron (who was still in Egypt) to go to the mountain where Moses had encountered God at the burning bush and meet his brother there. Moses told Aaron everything that had happened, and together they went to Egypt, gathered the elders together, and informed them of these matters. When Moses and Aaron performed the signs in the presence of the people, they believed these leaders had been sent by God to deliver them from their affliction (Ex 4:30-31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheThird40YearsFromEgypttoCanaan\">The Third 40 Years—From Egypt to Canaan<\/p>\n<h5>The Encounter with Pharaoh<\/h5>\n<p>Soon after his return to Egypt, Moses, accompanied by Aaron, went to Pharaoh and repeated the demands of the Lord, “Let my people go, for they must go out into the wilderness to hold a religious festival in my honor” (Ex 5:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). Pharaoh rejected the demand with the observation that he had never heard of this God of Moses. When one realizes that Egyptian kings considered themselves to be gods, the affront to Pharaoh becomes even more acute. Not only did he reject Moses’ demands, but he intensified the burdens of the Hebrews. Their work had up until then required them to make brick using straw provided for them, but now Pharaoh said they would have to gather their own straw and still produce the same number of bricks. The Hebrews turned in anguish and anger to Moses and blamed him for making them offensive in the sight of Pharaoh. Even Moses could not understand the turn of events and complained bitterly to God. God reassured Moses that he would deliver the Hebrews from their bondage, and moreover, he would bring them into the land he had promised Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He then instructed Moses to return to Pharaoh and repeat the demand to release the Hebrews upon threat of severe reprisal if the demand were ignored.<\/p>\n<p>Ushered again into Pharaoh’s presence, Moses repeated his request for release of the Israelites. He attempted to impress Pharaoh by turning his rod into a serpent, but the Egyptian wise men, through their secret arts, were able to duplicate the miracle, so Pharaoh’s heart remained hardened and he would not listen to Moses. In rapid succession Moses brought nine plagues upon the land of Egypt to show the omnipotence of God to force the compliance of Pharaoh. These included a plague in which the water of the Nile turned to blood, a plague of frogs, one of gnats, then of flies, a plague on the livestock, boils on the people, plagues of hail, locusts, and complete darkness. During the plagues of the frogs, flies, hail, locusts, and darkness, Pharaoh was distraught and would temporarily relent and agree to Moses’ demands, but as soon as the plague was lifted, his heart hardened and he would retract his promise. The outcome of the first nine plagues was terrible devastation of the land of Egypt, but the Israelites were not released. There was yet one more plague in store, the most terrible of all.<\/p>\n<h5>The First Passover<\/h5>\n<p>God told Moses that there remained one more plague in store for the Egyptians: “All the firstborn sons will die in every family in Egypt, from the oldest son of Pharaoh, who sits on the throne, to the oldest son of his lowliest slave. Even the firstborn of the animals will die” (Ex 11:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). Furthermore, he assured Moses that the plague would not touch a single household of the Hebrews, “Then you will know that the <span>Lord<\/span> makes a distinction between the Egyptians and the Israelites” (v 7, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>God instructed the people through Moses and Aaron to make their preparations for leaving the land in haste. They were to go to the Egyptians and ask them for their jewels of silver and gold (Ex 11:2-3), a request to which the Egyptians agreed, perhaps out of fear of the Hebrews and in the belief that the gifts would bring about an end of the terrors that had struck the land. The Hebrews were also instructed to prepare a lamb for each family—small families could share—for the last meal to be eaten in the land of Egypt (a rite that became the pattern for the Jewish observance of the Passover for many centuries). Blood of the lamb was to be put on the doorposts and lintels of the houses in which the Passover meal was being eaten that night. The Hebrews were promised that wherever the blood was on the door, no harm would come to that household. They were also instructed to prepare unleavened bread. At midnight the death angel of the Lord killed all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh himself to the lowest captive in a dungeon; not a single house of the Egyptians escaped tragedy. When Pharaoh saw what had happened, he ordered Moses and the people to leave the land at once (12:31-32). The biblical record says that about 600,000 Hebrew men left Egypt. Together with women and children, the total would have been in excess of 2 million people.<\/p>\n<h5>The Exodus from Egypt<\/h5>\n<p>The exodus is the central event of the OT and marks the birth of Israel as a nation. The Jewish people still look back to that event as the great redemptive act of God in history on behalf of his people, much as Christians look upon the cross as the great redemptive act of their faith.<\/p>\n\n<p>The exact route taken by the Hebrews out of Egypt cannot be determined today, though many possibilities have been proposed. They did not take the shortest, most direct route to Canaan (which would have been about a 10 days’ journey along the Mediterranean coastline), but set out in the direction of Mt Sinai, where Moses had earlier met God at the burning bush. As a sign that Moses had been sent to deliver the people, God told Moses he would bring them to that same spot, where they would worship God (Ex 3:12). The Hebrews did not forget the request of Joseph to carry his bones with them when they returned to their own land (Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19).<\/p>\n<p>As the people journeyed, they were preceded by a pillar of cloud during the day and a pillar of fire at night. The cloud represented the presence of God with his people and guided them along the route they should travel.<\/p>\n<p>Back in Egypt, Pharaoh was having second thoughts about letting the Hebrews leave the land and decided to pursue them with his army and bring them back. When the Hebrews saw the approaching cloud of dust and realized that the Egyptian army was pursuing them, they were terrified. The sea lay ahead of them and the Egyptians were behind; there seemed to be no way of escape. The people turned on Moses, blaming him for bringing them out of Egypt. God again assured them that they did not need to be afraid or do anything to defend themselves. He promised to fight the battle for them and give them victory (Ex 14:14).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord parted the water of the Sea of Reeds (traditionally but erroneously referred to as the Red Sea) by a strong east wind and allowed the Israelites to pass through the sea on dry ground to the other side. The Egyptians rushed after the Israelites, following them into the dry bed of the sea. But before they reached the other side, the waters rushed back together, destroying the Egyptian army in the midst of the sea and leaving the Israelites safe on the other side. The people celebrated their great deliverance in song (Ex 15) and then continued their journey. The narrative that follows describes the struggle of the Israelites to survive in the desert—problems of food and water, internal dissension, murmurings against Moses, and battles with enemies. Through all their experiences, Moses towers as the unifying force and great spiritual leader.<\/p>\n<p>In spite of having seen God’s great act of deliverance so recently, the faith of the Israelites was not strong. Three days later they came to a place where the water was not fit to drink, and they began complaining against Moses. The Lord showed Moses how to purify the water, and the people’s needs were satisfied (Ex 15:22-25). When they reached the wilderness of Sin, they complained again, this time because of lack of food. God met their need by supplying manna, a breadlike substance that would serve as their food until they came to Canaan (16:1-21). Later, camped at Rephidim, the people complained again, this time for lack of water. Once again God met their needs by supplying water from the rock at Horeb (17:1-7). The Amalekites attacked them while they were still camped at Rephidim, but God gave a great victory to the Israelites (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Moses and the people reached Sinai and camped there. Jethro came to visit, bringing Moses’ wife and sons. Zipporah had apparently decided to return with her children to stay with her father rather than to go on to Egypt with Moses. It was a joyful reunion, and Jethro made a burnt offering and sacrifices to God (an act that has evoked the suggestion that Jethro was a true worshiper of God, though nothing is known of his links to the Hebrew faith). When Jethro observed Moses trying to settle all the disputes and problems of the Hebrews unaided, he proposed that Moses delegate responsibility for some of the lesser matters to able men chosen from among the people. Moses accepted the suggestion, and shortly afterward Jethro returned to his own land. He did not remain at Sinai to participate in the ratification of the covenant (Ex 18:13-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Giving of the Law at Sinai<\/h5>\n<p>God had kept his promises to Moses. He had delivered the Hebrews from their Egyptian bondage and brought them to the very place where he had commissioned Moses to be their leader. He was now ready to enter into a covenant relationship with Israel. Amid a spectacular and terrifying scene of lightning, thunder, thick clouds, fire, smoke, and earthquake, God descended to the top of Sinai and called Moses to come up the mountain, where he remained 40 days to receive the law that would become the basis of the covenant.<\/p>\n<p>At Sinai, God was revealed as the God who demands exclusive allegiance in all areas of life and, at the same time, as the God who desires personal fellowship with his people.<\/p>\n<h5>Apostasy of the People<\/h5>\n<p>While Moses tarried on Mt Sinai, the people below became impatient and skeptical about his return, so they went to Aaron and asked him to make idols for them to worship. They contributed the gold earrings they were wearing. “Then Aaron took the gold, melted it down, and molded and tooled it into the shape of a calf. The people exclaimed, ‘O Israel, these are the gods who brought you out of Egypt!’ ” (Ex 32:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). The next day they joined in the worship of the idol with sacrifices and revelry. God told Moses what was taking place below and angrily declared that he was going to destroy the people but would make a great nation of Moses and his descendants. Moses immediately interceded on behalf of the people, and God’s wrath abated. Moses descended the mountain, carrying the two tablets of stone on which the law had been written, but when he entered the camp and saw what was taking place, he could not restrain his anger. He threw the stone tablets to the ground, ground the golden calf to powder, mixed it with water, and forced the people to drink it. He turned angrily to Aaron and demanded an explanation for the great sin that had been committed. Aaron lamely tried to shift the blame by minimizing his own role: “I threw them [the gold] into the fire—and out came this calf!” (v 24, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses called for volunteers to carry out God’s judgment on the people for the great sin they had committed. Men of the tribe of Levi responded and executed about 3,000 men. Later they were commended and rewarded (Dt 33:9-10). Moses again interceded for the people, requesting that he be destroyed with the rest if God could not forgive them. God relented and promised Moses that the angel of the Lord would go with them still (Ex 32:34).<\/p>\n<p>Then Moses made a special request that he might be allowed to see the glory of the Lord. God instructed Moses to hew out two more tablets of stone like the ones he had destroyed and to return to the top of the mountain the next day. There the Lord passed before him and proclaimed his name: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, the merciful and gracious God. I am slow to anger and rich in unfailing love and faithfulness” (Ex 34:6, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses remained on the mountain another 40 days, where he received renewed warnings against idolatry and further instructions from the Lord, together with another copy of the Ten Commandments on tablets of stone. When Moses came down from the mountain, he was not aware that the skin of his face shone as a result of talking with God. At first the people were afraid to come near him, but he called them together and repeated all the Lord had said to him on the mountain. Afterward, he covered his face with a veil, which he removed only when he went into the presence of the Lord. Paul said the purpose of the veil was to prevent the people from seeing the heavenly light gradually fade from Moses’ face (2 Cor 3:13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Tabernacle and Establishment of the Priesthood<\/h5>\n<p>When Moses went up to the mountain the first time to receive the law from God, he was instructed to collect materials to be used in the construction of the tabernacle or tent. Gold, silver, bronze, blue and purple and scarlet yarn, fine twined linen, goats’ hair, tanned rams’ skins, goatskins, and acacia wood would be needed, along with oil for the lamps, spices for the anointing oil and for the fragrant incense, onyx stones, and stones for setting (Ex 25:3-7). The pattern for construction was also given to him, together with the ritual to be used for the consecration of the priests. A man named Bezalel was put in charge of the construction of the tabernacle, assisted by Oholiab (31:1-6). The tabernacle was portable like a tent so that it could be taken down and moved from place to place as the Hebrews continued their journey toward Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to giving Moses directions for the tabernacle, God also instructed him concerning the sacrifices that were to be brought: the burnt offering, grain offering, peace offering, sin offering, and guilt offering (Lv 1–7). The solemn ceremony for ordaining Aaron and his sons as priests and for inaugurating the worship practices were to be performed by Moses (chs 8–9).<\/p>\n<p>Sometime after this solemn inauguration of the religious ritual actually took place, Nadab and Abihu, two of Aaron’s four sons, offered unauthorized fire before the Lord. A fire came out from the Lord and destroyed them. Moses forbade Aaron and his sons Eleazar and Ithamar to express grief because of the sinfulness of the act (Lv 10:1-7). The nature of their sin is difficult to determine, but it surely involved a violation of God’s holiness. Therefore, it is appropriate that a large part of the remainder of the book of Leviticus gives regulations that stress the holy living that God expected from his people.<\/p>\n<h5>From Sinai to Kadesh<\/h5>\n<p>A year had elapsed from the time the Israelites left Egypt until the census was taken (Nm 9:1). God reminded the people that it was time to observe the Passover, which they did, and a month later they set out from Sinai and came to the wilderness of Paran. Along the way they complained about the unvarying diet of manna and they longed for the fish, cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions, and garlic they had eaten in Egypt (11:4-6). In anger God sent quail in abundance, but even while the people were devouring the meat, God sent a great plague that killed many Israelites. The complaining attitude of the people was shared even by Miriam and Aaron. They began to speak against the Cushite woman Moses had married (12:1-2). It is not certain whether the Cushite was an Ethiopian or whether this was another way of referring to Zipporah. If Moses did marry a second time, no mention is made of it elsewhere in the OT. Moses made no reply to the accusations of his brother and sister. It was not necessary, for God intervened in defense of his servant. He smote Miriam with leprosy for her part in speaking against Moses, and when Aaron saw what had happened to Miriam, he acknowledged that they both had sinned. Miriam’s leprosy was removed in response to Moses’ fervent intercession.<\/p>\n\n<p>While the people were encamped at Kadesh (also called Kadesh-barnea—Nm 32:8) in the wilderness of Paran, Moses sent 12 men into Canaan, one from each tribe, to spy out the land in preparation for the Israelite entry. After 40 days the spies returned and, though they acknowledged that the land was fertile and inviting, 10 of them were afraid of the Canaanite inhabitants and advised against going into the land. Only Joshua and Caleb were willing to go ahead and occupy the territory. The entire congregation joined the protest against going in and determined to choose a new leader and return to Egypt rather than risk death by the sword in Canaan. They threatened to stone Moses and Aaron. At that moment God intervened and would have destroyed all the people on the spot except for the intervention of Moses (13:1–14:19). He declared that, if God did not bring the people into Canaan, the nations round about would conclude that the God of the Israelites was unable to bring them into the land. Once again God acquiesced to Moses’ request to pardon the people but said that none of them 20 years and older who had complained against him would be allowed to enter the land. All the people would wander in the wilderness for 40 years until that generation died, and then their children would be allowed to enter Canaan (14:29-33). When they heard the Lord’s sentence upon them, the people quickly decided to lift the sentence of judgment by entering the land at once, but God was not with them, and they suffered a disastrous defeat at the hands of the Amalekites and Canaanites.<\/p>\n<h5>Forty Years in the Wilderness<\/h5>\n<p>Very little is known about events during the 40 years of wilderness wanderings. In spite of the judgment that had already come upon them, the people did not seem to change their ways. A man named Korah led another rebellion against the authority of Moses and Aaron. God would not listen to the pleas of Moses and Aaron on behalf of these dissidents (Nm 16:22-24), but told the congregation to separate itself from the tents of Korah and his conspirators. While the people watched, the ground split open and swallowed up the rebellious factions together with their households and all their possessions. Though the rest of the Israelites witnessed the fate of the rebels, it did not deter them from again turning on Moses and Aaron. At this, God told Moses to remove himself from the murmuring congregation in order that he could take vengeance. Though Moses offered atonement for the people’s sins, 14,700 died by plague before the punishment was ended. To demonstrate further to the people that Moses was his chosen leader, the Lord instructed Moses to take rods, one for each tribe, and to deposit them in the tent of meeting. God would cause the rod of the man chosen by him to sprout, and so silence the murmurings of the people. The rod belonging to Aaron sprouted and budded and bloomed, but the people only complained more.<\/p>\n<p>As the people neared the end of their years of wilderness wanderings, Miriam died in Kadesh and was buried there (Nm 20:1). Soon after, the people began to complain once more for lack of water. God instructed Moses to speak to a rock that would bring forth water to satisfy the needs of the people. Instead of speaking to the rock, Moses struck it twice with his rod. The water came forth, but God rebuked Moses and Aaron: “Because you did not trust me enough to demonstrate my holiness to the people of Israel, you will not lead them into the land I am giving them!” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). The nature of the sin is not clear, but Moses and Aaron were apparently taking to themselves honor that belonged to God alone. Because of the sin, they were denied the privilege of leading the Israelites into the Promised Land. The punishment may seem too severe for the sin, but it shows that the privileged role of leadership given to Moses and Aaron carried with it an unusual measure of responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>The people then journeyed from Kadesh to Mt Hor on the border of the land of Edom, where Aaron died. Moses took his priestly garments from him and gave them to Eleazar, his son, thereby transferring the priestly office (Nm 20:28).<\/p>\n<p>As the people came closer to their destination, resistance on the part of the native population increased. There was a skirmish with the king of Arad and his forces at Hormah, resulting in a victory for Israel (Nm 21:1-3). As they journeyed around Edom, some of the Israelites began speaking against God and Moses because there was no food or water and they were tired of eating manna. This time the Lord sent poisonous snakes among the people, and many of them died of the venomous bites. Those who had not yet been bitten came to Moses, acknowledged their sin, and asked that the serpents be removed from their midst. God instructed Moses to make a serpent of bronze and set it on a pole. If a person bitten by a serpent looked up at the bronze serpent, he or she would live.<\/p>\n<p>As the Israelites approached the territory of Sihon, king of the Amorites, they sent messengers asking permission to pass peaceably through his land. Instead of granting the request, Sihon gathered his army together and fought against Israel. He was killed in the battle, and his land and cities were taken and occupied by the Hebrews (Nm 21:21-25).<\/p>\n<h5>Arrival at the Jordan River<\/h5>\n<p>After their victory over Sihon, the Israelites set out again and encamped in the plains of Moab on the east side of the Jordan River facing Jericho, in full view of the Promised Land. The Moabites were terrified by the presence of these people because they had heard what happened to the Amorites. Their king, Balak, hired a magician named Balaam to curse the Israelites. Three times Balaam attempted to curse them, but each time God turned his words into a blessing (Nm 22–24). Though unable to curse the Israelites, Balaam was responsible for an even greater calamity. He advised the Moabites to entice the Israelites to sacrifice to their gods and bow down to them (Nm 25:1-3; 31:16; 2 Pt 2:15; Rv 2:14). While the people were worshiping the Moabite deity, Baal of Peor, God’s anger was kindled against them, and he sent a plague that killed 24,000 of them (Nm 25:9). It was Israel’s first encounter with the seductive allurement of licentious idolatry and an ominous foreview of what would happen after they settled down in Canaan. Their continued attraction to idolatry would be their final undoing.<\/p>\n<p>After the plague, God instructed Moses and Eleazar to take another census of the people like the one almost 40 years earlier. A whole generation of Israelites had died in the wilderness, but they had been replaced by an almost equal number, so that now there were 601,730 men 20 years and older who were able to go to war (Nm 26:51). Not a man remained of those who had been counted in the first census, except Caleb and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord instructed Moses to lay hands on Joshua and commission him as the new leader in the sight of Eleazar the priest and all the congregation (Nm 27:12-23). In addition, the Lord gave Moses instructions concerning feasts and offerings and vows (chs 28–30). God ordered Moses, as his last act as leader, to avenge the Israelites on the Midianites. In that battle the armies of Israel gained a great victory over the Midianites, killing their kings, their men, and also Balaam.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord gave instructions to Moses concerning the boundaries that would mark the Promised Land and named the men who would divide the land among the tribes (Nm 34). He also ordered that 48 cities be given to the Levites, the priestly tribe, as their portion. Six of these were designated as cities of refuge where murderers could flee so that they would not be killed by those seeking vengeance without having an opportunity to stand before the congregation for judgment (ch 35).<\/p>\n<h5>Moses’ Death<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy has often been called Moses’ valedictory speech to the people, for in it Moses is not merely the chief speaker but the only speaker. With the congregation of his people gathered before him, he rehearsed all that God had done for them since leaving Sinai, and he reminded them of their failure to enter the Promised Land 38 years earlier (Dt 2:14). He recalled his plea that God would let him cross the Jordan and see the land that was to be the home of the people, but God responded that Moses would only be allowed to view the land from the top of Pisgah. Moses then exhorted the people to obey the statutes and ordinances that had been given to them in order to experience God’s blessings in the land.<\/p>\n\n<p>As the day of Moses’ death approached, the Lord ordered Moses and Joshua to present themselves at the tent of meeting in order for Joshua to be commissioned as the new leader (Dt 31:14-23). Before his death, Moses pronounced a blessing upon all the Israelites (ch 33). Having completed these tasks, Moses went up from the plains of Moab to Mt Nebo, and to the top of Pisgah. From there God showed him the land promised long ago to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—the land that was soon to be the home of the wandering Israelite tribes. Again God told him that he would not be allowed to cross over the Jordan. Moses died there and God buried him somewhere in the valley in the land of Moab opposite Beth-peor (34:6). Moses was 120 years old when he died, and the Israelites mourned his death for 30 days. The finest tribute to Moses is found in the closing words of the book of Deuteronomy, “There has never been another prophet like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (v 10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MosesintheNewTestament\">Moses in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>All Jews and Christians in apostolic times considered Moses the author of the Pentateuch. Such expressions as “the law of Moses” (Lk 2:22), “Moses commanded” (Mt 19:7), “Moses said” (Mk 7:10) “and Moses wrote” (12:19) shows that his name was synonymous with the OT books attributed to him. He is mentioned in the NT more than any other OT figure, a total of 79 times. His role as lawgiver is emphasized more than any other aspect of his life (Mt 8:4; Mk 7:10; Jn 1:17; Acts 15:1). He appears at the transfiguration of Jesus as the representative of OT law, along with Elijah as the representative of OT prophets (Mt 17:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses’ role as prophet is also mentioned in the NT. As a prophet, he spoke of the coming Messiah and his sufferings (Lk 24:25-27; Acts 3:22). The NT also draws from the life and experiences of Moses to show patterns of life under the new covenant. The nativity story of Jesus parallels the Mosaic story of the infant deliverer being rescued from the evil designs of an earthly despot (Mt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount parallels the giving of the law at Sinai (Mt 5–7) and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of the will of God. Contrast between the old law and the new relationship with God is especially marked in the book of Galatians. The comparison of Moses with Christ is an important emphasis of the book of Hebrews (Heb 3:5-6; 9:11-22). John contrasted the law that was given through Moses with the grace and truth that came through Jesus Christ (Jn 1:17). He also contrasted the manna in the wilderness to Jesus as “the bread of life” (6:30-35).<\/p>\n<p>Other references to Moses or to events associated with him include his birth (Acts 7:20; Heb 11:23), the burning bush (Lk 20:37), the magicians of Egypt (2 Tm 3:8), the Passover (Heb 11:28), the exodus (3:16), crossing of the sea (1 Cor 10:2), the covenant sacrifice at Sinai (Mt 26:28), the manna (1 Cor 10:3), the glory on Moses’ face (2 Cor 3:7-18), water from the rock (1 Cor 10:4), the bronze serpent (Jn 3:14), and the song of Moses (Rv 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Egypt, Egyptian; Exodus, The; Israel, History of; Plagues upon Egypt; Priests and Levites; Tabernacle; Temple; Commandments, The Ten; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MOSES Great leader of the Hebrew people who brought them out of bondage in Egypt to the Promised Land in Canaan; also the one who gave them the law at Mt Sinai that became the basis for their religious faith through the centuries. Focused in this one person are the figures of prophet, priest, lawgiver, judge, intercessor, shepherd, miracle worker, and founder of a nation. The meaning of his name is uncertain. It has been explained as a Hebrew word meaning “to draw out” (Ex 2:10; cf. 2 Sm 22:1...","summary_en":"MOSES Great leader of the Hebrew people who brought them out of bondage in Egypt to the Promised Land in Canaan; also the one who gave them the law at Mt Sinai that became the basis for their religious faith through the centuries. Focused in this one person are the figures of prophet, priest, lawgiver, judge, intercessor, shepherd, miracle worker, and founder of a nation. The meaning of his name is uncertain. It has been explained as a Hebrew word meaning “to draw out” (Ex 2:10; cf. 2 Sm 22:1...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56441,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:30","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:30","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:30<\/strong> The crowd demanded <em>a miraculous sign<\/em> to demonstrate Jesus’ status as Messiah. Jews believed that when the Messiah appeared, he would duplicate the great miracle of Moses. Manna would once again fall, and everyone would consider it a second exodus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:30<\/strong> The crowd demanded <em>a miraculous sign<\/em> to demonstrate Jesus’ status as Messiah. Jews believed that when the Messiah appeared, he would duplicate the great miracle of Moses. Manna would once again fall, and everyone would consider it a second exodus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:30 The crowd demanded a miraculous sign to demonstrate Jesus’ status as Messiah. Jews believed that when the Messiah appeared, he would duplicate the great miracle of Moses. Manna would once again fall, and everyone would consider it a second exodus.","summary_en":"6:30 The crowd demanded a miraculous sign to demonstrate Jesus’ status as Messiah. Jews believed that when the Messiah appeared, he would duplicate the great miracle of Moses. Manna would once again fall, and everyone would consider it a second exodus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84067,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:30","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:30","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:30<\/strong> The crowd demanded <em>a miraculous sign<\/em> to demonstrate Jesus’ status as Messiah. Jews believed that when the Messiah appeared, he would duplicate the great miracle of Moses. Manna would once again fall, and everyone would consider it a second exodus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:30<\/strong> The crowd demanded <em>a miraculous sign<\/em> to demonstrate Jesus’ status as Messiah. Jews believed that when the Messiah appeared, he would duplicate the great miracle of Moses. Manna would once again fall, and everyone would consider it a second exodus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:30 The crowd demanded a miraculous sign to demonstrate Jesus’ status as Messiah. Jews believed that when the Messiah appeared, he would duplicate the great miracle of Moses. Manna would once again fall, and everyone would consider it a second exodus.","summary_en":"6:30 The crowd demanded a miraculous sign to demonstrate Jesus’ status as Messiah. Jews believed that when the Messiah appeared, he would duplicate the great miracle of Moses. Manna would once again fall, and everyone would consider it a second exodus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111693,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:30","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:30","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:30<\/strong> The crowd demanded <em>a miraculous sign<\/em> to demonstrate Jesus’ status as Messiah. Jews believed that when the Messiah appeared, he would duplicate the great miracle of Moses. Manna would once again fall, and everyone would consider it a second exodus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:30<\/strong> The crowd demanded <em>a miraculous sign<\/em> to demonstrate Jesus’ status as Messiah. Jews believed that when the Messiah appeared, he would duplicate the great miracle of Moses. Manna would once again fall, and everyone would consider it a second exodus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:30 The crowd demanded a miraculous sign to demonstrate Jesus’ status as Messiah. Jews believed that when the Messiah appeared, he would duplicate the great miracle of Moses. Manna would once again fall, and everyone would consider it a second exodus.","summary_en":"6:30 The crowd demanded a miraculous sign to demonstrate Jesus’ status as Messiah. Jews believed that when the Messiah appeared, he would duplicate the great miracle of Moses. Manna would once again fall, and everyone would consider it a second exodus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139319,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:30","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:30","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:30<\/strong> The crowd demanded <em>a miraculous sign<\/em> to demonstrate Jesus’ status as Messiah. Jews believed that when the Messiah appeared, he would duplicate the great miracle of Moses. Manna would once again fall, and everyone would consider it a second exodus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:30<\/strong> The crowd demanded <em>a miraculous sign<\/em> to demonstrate Jesus’ status as Messiah. Jews believed that when the Messiah appeared, he would duplicate the great miracle of Moses. Manna would once again fall, and everyone would consider it a second exodus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:30 The crowd demanded a miraculous sign to demonstrate Jesus’ status as Messiah. Jews believed that when the Messiah appeared, he would duplicate the great miracle of Moses. Manna would once again fall, and everyone would consider it a second exodus.","summary_en":"6:30 The crowd demanded a miraculous sign to demonstrate Jesus’ status as Messiah. Jews believed that when the Messiah appeared, he would duplicate the great miracle of Moses. Manna would once again fall, and everyone would consider it a second exodus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65843,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93469,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121095,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148721,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"31":[{"id":4895,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Old Testament in the New Testament Bible*, Quotations","title_en":"of the Old Testament in the New Testament Bible*, Quotations","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, Q<span>uotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers.<\/p>\n<p>The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotations in distinctive print, this may not be easily seen, for the NT writers often weave the OT words into their own without indicating they are borrowing from the OT. There are over 400 passages of the OT that are explicitly cited in the NT. Almost half of these are introduced by a statement like “Scripture says” to draw attention to the fact that the authority and thought of the OT is being implemented. For the others, however, the OT words are woven into the fabric of the author’s own statement.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the over 400 passages cited explicitly, there are well over 1,000 places where there is an allusion to an OT text, event, or person. The difference between a quotation and an allusion is sometimes debated for particular texts, but usually the distinction is that in a quotation the author consciously uses the words of an OT passage, whereas with an allusion he has the texts in mind but is not consciously trying to use the words.<\/p>\n<p>Quotations are easy to identify if there is an introductory formula such as “the Scripture says” (as in Rom 10:11; cf. Is 28:16). Where there is no introductory formula, it is easy to overlook explicit quotations (Rom 10:13; cf. Jl 2:32). The allusions are, of course, harder still to recognize, but they often provide the key to interpretation. For example, John 1:14-18—with its mention of glory, grace and truth, Moses, and the fact that no one has seen God—is much more easily and profoundly understood when read in connection with Exodus 33:17–34:8. In the Exodus passage the glory of God and his grace and truth are revealed to Moses. The author was showing that a much more complete revelation of God was given in Jesus than was given Moses in the account recorded in Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, significant light is shed on many NT passages from OT passages with similar ideas and words even where the NT author may not have been consciously alluding to those texts (e.g. Mt 16:19; Is 22:22). What was behind the author’s thinking is not certain, but in such cases the NT reflects the thinking, the culture, and language of the OT period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DistributionofOldTestamentQuotations\">Distribution of Old Testament Quotations<\/p>\n<p>The books of the NT that show the most dependence on the OT are Matthew, John, Romans, Hebrews, 1 Peter, and Revelation. Such a statement can be misleading, however, because the writers have different methods.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew quotes or consciously reflects the wording of OT passages about 62 times, almost half of which have an introductory formula. The book of Revelation, on the other hand, never quotes the OT and never has an introductory formula but is probably more dependent on the OT than any other NT book. The book of Hebrews quotes or consciously reflects the OT about 59 times, again half of which have an introductory formula, but the Gospel of John does so only 18 times, nearly always with an introductory formula. However, the allusions to the OT are present on virtually every page of John’s Gospel, so much so that some scholars have argued that he has modeled his account on the exodus narrative, the Jewish feasts, or OT persons and images. Paul’s Letter to the Romans uses the OT 54 times (about three-fourths of which have introductory formulas), but nowhere else so frequently (e.g., 1 Cor 16 times, Gal 11 times, Phil one time, 1 Thes one time).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the indication that Philippians and 1 Thessalonians use the OT only once each, some other books make explicit use of the OT rarely or never. Colossians, Titus, Philemon, and the Johannine letters do not use the OT at all; 2 Timothy and Jude use the OT only once; while 2 Peter and 1 Timothy make use of it twice.<\/p>\n<p>The important point is to realize that the OT is used most frequently in circumstances where the audience is familiar with the OT or where the OT is essential for describing the events relating to Christ and the church. The books using the OT most frequently (Mt, Jn, Rom, Heb, 1 Pt, Rv) either stem from or are addressed to a Jewish context or, as in the case of Romans and John, deal specifically with the relation of Jews and Christians. The Gospels make rather extensive use of the OT because the language of the OT is necessary to convey the identity and importance of Jesus in the purposes of God. Similarly 1 Peter uses the OT frequently because the author is trying to convey to his persecuted audience that they are the people of God and the inheritors of the promises of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DifficultiesinInterpretation\">Difficulties in Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>Often when people think of quotations of the OT in the NT they think only in terms of prophecy. Some have been guilty of counting up the OT statements that the NT applies to Christ and the church and then claiming these OT texts as predictions that prove Jesus is the Messiah. Such a procedure is filled with problems because it is too simplistic and does not do justice to either the OT or to the way the NT uses it. Of course, the early church used the OT to show that Jesus fulfilled the promises of God and did God’s work, but the use the church made of the OT was quite varied and much of it cannot be classified as predictive prophecy. Prophecy itself is too complex to be limited to predictive thinking.<\/p>\n<p>Some of the most obvious examples of the difficulties appear in Matthew’s Gospel, although they are by no means confined there. Matthew 2:15—“Out of Egypt I called my son”—is a quotation of Hosea 11:1, but in Hosea these words do not refer to the Messiah. They refer to the nation of Israel. Similarly Matthew 2:18 quotes Jeremiah 31:15 (“A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more,” <span>niv<\/span>) as fulfilled in the slaughter of the innocent babies in Bethlehem, but in Jeremiah the weeping is over the destruction of Jerusalem. John 12:40 views Isaiah 6:10 as fulfilled in Jesus’ ministry, but this verse deals with the call of Isaiah and is not a prediction concerning the ministry of the Messiah. The examples could be multiplied but these should be sufficient to illustrate the problem. For this reason the NT writers have often been accused of twisting the Scriptures, but this charge is as simplistic as the thought that all prophecy is predictive and in fact springs from the same error. Therefore, any attempt to understand the use of the OT in the NT will have to deal with the variety of ways in which the OT is used and with the methods employed by the NT writers.<\/p>\n<p>There are other difficulties that are encountered as well. Sometimes the NT writer will indicate that some fact related to Christ is a fulfillment of the OT but the explicit text that he had in mind cannot be identified. For example, John 7:38 introduces the words “Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water” with the statement “as Scripture has said.” No OT text reads this way. Possibly the allusion is to the rock that provided water in the wilderness (Ex 17:1), or to the waters that flowed from the new temple (Zec 14:8) or, more generally, it may be a reference to Isaiah 58:11. Similarly, the difficulty in determining the OT text behind the prophecy that Christ will be called a Nazarene (Mt 2:23) is notorious. Probably the reference is to Isaiah 11:1 and the Hebrew word there translated as “branch,” but the connection is not easily made and is not certain. A third example of this kind of difficulty is in 1 Corinthians 14:34, where Paul indicates that women should be in submission just as the Law says, but there is no OT text expressing this idea. His statement in probably to be understood as a summary rather than a quotation or allusion. Similarly on a few occasions an OT text is seemingly attributed to the wrong OT book. In Mark 1:2-3 an OT quotation is attributed to Isaiah but the quotation is really a conflation (or mixing) of Exodus 23:20, Malachi 3:1, and Isaiah 40:3. Matthew 27:9-10 quotes a passage that is said to be from Jeremiah, when really it is dependent on Zechariah 11:13 and might best be described as a summary of Zechariah 11:12-13, with certain words included from Jeremiah 32:6-9. These two examples do not create a major problem, however, for the determination of the origin of the words may be due to their use in collections of quotations from various prophets, in which case the more prominent prophets would be used to designate origin.<\/p>\n<p>The wording of the quotations of the OT text does not always conform to the modern form of the OT. Just as today there are numerous translations of the Bible, when the NT was being written there were various forms of the OT text. With regard to the Hebrew text (for the OT was written mostly in Hebrew), there were different traditions. Such differences in the Hebrew traditions would have been relatively small. Because of the increasing importance of Aramaic after the Babylonian captivity and of Greek after the conquests of Alexander the Great, the OT was also known and used in both these languages when the NT was being written. In fact, the Jews found it necessary in their synagogue services after reading the Hebrew OT to paraphrase the reading in Aramaic so that all could understand. These paraphrases were later written down and are known as Targums. The Greek translation of the OT that stems from the third century <span>BC<\/span> is known as the Septuagint, but there were also other Greek translations in use. This being the case, the wording of a NT quotation is not identical in every detail to the text of the Hebrew OT.<\/p>\n<p>Added to the fact that there were various forms of the text known in first-century <span>AD<\/span> Palestine is the complicating factor that NT writers often did not intend to quote the OT exactly. The use of formal quotation marks is a modern device, and ancient writers were not so taken by technical precision. They were more concerned with the intention of a text and consequently might copy or quote it verbatim, quote it from memory, use or adapt part of a verse, or even change certain words as they borrowed the verse to express their points. (The NT writers often use the OT words describing God’s actions in the past to explain what he has done in their time.) The importance of any differences between the NT quotation and the OT depends on the use to which the quotation is put and the degree to which the use is dependent on textual differences.<\/p>\n<p>Some examples should illustrate the nature of these difficulties. Ephesians 4:8 quotes Psalm 68:18. Whereas the Hebrew and Septuagint read, “You ascended to the heights, you lead captivity captive, you received gifts among mankind,” Ephesians records the verse as “After he ascended into the heights, <em>he<\/em> led captivity captive; he <em>gave<\/em> gifts to men.” Paul is stressing that Christ has given grace to people for ministry. He has either adapted the wording of the OT to make his point or he quoted a variant reading, <em>“he gave<\/em> gifts.” Some versions do have this reading. In fact, the Targum understands this verse as Moses giving the words of the law to the children of men, and Paul may well be adapting this understanding to the new revelation that has come in Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 1:23 quotes Isaiah 7:14, but there are distinct differences between the Hebrew text and the wording in Matthew. The Hebrew reads, “Behold the young woman will become pregnant and will bear a son and you will call his name Immanuel,” whereas Matthew’s text records “Behold, the <em>virgin<\/em> will become pregnant and will bear a son, and <em>they<\/em> will call his name Immanuel.” The Septuagint does have the specific word “virgin,” like Matthew, but is not the source of Matthew’s quotation since other differences exist. Some have argued that the change from “you will call” to “they will call” was made by Matthew when he applied the words to Jesus. However, there are several traditions known for this part of the quotation and partial support for the reading in Matthew is provided by the text of Isaiah found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>Romans 11:26-27 is a conflation of Isaiah 59:20-21 and part of Isaiah 27:9, but there are important differences. One of these is that the OT has “the redeemer will come to Zion,” whereas Romans has “the deliverer will come <em>from<\/em> Zion.” The change to “from Zion” could indicate that Paul had a different textual tradition, could be the result of an intentional change by Paul, or more probably, could reflect the wording of Psalm 14:7.<\/p>\n<p>An awareness of the difficulties involved in the quotations of the OT by the NT writers will prohibit a simplistic approach and will prevent hasty conclusions. Care to ask not only which text was used but also which form of the text was used and how is obviously essential in any serious study. In addition it is necessary to allow for the possibility that the NT writers knew forms of a text that are now lost.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMethodsoftheNewTestamentWriters\">The Methods of the New Testament Writers<\/p>\n<p>The methods used by the NT writers were not unique to them. Many of these methods were also employed in first-century Judaism. In fact, both the technique used in quoting and the understanding of the OT text itself in many cases are paralleled in Judaism. For example, from the standpoint of technique used in quoting, the same kinds of formula introductions are used in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the rabbinic writings, and elsewhere. The rabbinic technique of “pearl stringing,” that is, of applying verses from various parts of the OT (the Law, the Prophets, the Writings) to a subject, can be seen especially in Paul’s writings (note Rom 9:12-19 or 11:8-10). Somewhat related is the practice of using quotations that all contain a key word or key words (note 1 Pt 2:6-8, which draws together quotations using the word “stone,” or Rom 15:9-12, which joins OT verses referring to the “nations”).<\/p>\n<p>The methods used in the NT to interpret an OT text are also displayed in Judaism. Some passages interpret the OT “literally,” such as Jesus’ replies during temptation (see the quotations of Dt 8:3; 6:16; 6:13; in Mt 4:3-10), his teachings on marriage based on Genesis 2:24 (Mt 19:5), or Paul’s use of Habakkuk 2:4 (Rom 1:17) or Genesis 15:6 (Rom 4:3-9). Many such examples could be given. With regard to prophecy, some of these statements are fulfilled in a “literal” or “direct” way in keeping with the intention of the OT (e.g., Mi 5:2, Bethlehem as the birthplace of the Messiah; Mt 2:4-6). Jeremiah 31:31-34, the promise of the new covenant, is viewed as directly fulfilled in Christ (Heb 8:7-13). The prophecy of Joel 2:28-32 concerning the pouring out of the Spirit of the Lord is directly fulfilled in the Pentecost event (Acts 2:17-21), but the changing of the sun to darkness and the moon to blood are certainly not understood literally in connection with this event.<\/p>\n<p>A different method of interpretation is based on the concept of <em>corporate solidarity.<\/em> This technical expression is an attempt to convey the idea that the individuals among God’s people are not merely individuals; they are part of a larger whole. Consequently, what is said about the individual can apply to the whole and vice versa. This is the reason the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah is seen both as the nation (44:1) and as an individual (52:13–53:12). Also the king is sometimes viewed as representative of the nation. The easiest places to see the concept of corporate solidarity are in the effect of the sin of Achan on all the people (Jos 7) or the sin of David in numbering the people (1 Chr 21:3-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>Correspondence in history<\/em> is not so much a method of interpretation as it is a way of thinking about God. It assumes that the things that happen to God’s people are the things that have happened to previous generations and that God is faithful and operates in the present as he has in the past. Consequently, the trials and deliverance of God’s people are often expressed with words borrowed from the previous accounts of God’s people. Isaiah describes the anticipated deliverance in terms of a second exodus (11:15-16). Ezekiel describes the king set up over the people in terms of a second David (Ez 37:25). In the NT, Revelation 22 describes the new heavens and the new earth in terms of the Garden of Eden (Gn 2–3). Sometimes this technique is described as “typology,” but this term has been used for so many questionable interpretations that it is misleading. The most important thing about this concept is that it is a view of God and his working among his people.<\/p>\n<p>With these two concepts, the way that the OT is quoted in the NT can be understood. The conviction that Jesus was the promised deliverer and that the last days had dawned in his ministry are evident everywhere. The quotation of Hosea 11:1 can be used in Matthew 2:15 because of corporate solidarity and correspondence in history. What was said of the nation is true of the one who is its representative, and there is correspondence in their respective histories. Jeremiah 31:15 can be used in Matthew 2:18 because of correspondence in history and especially because Jeremiah looked forward to God’s intention for Israel and prophesied a new covenant (31:17, 31-34). Matthew saw not only the correspondence in history but believed that in Jesus this promised salvation had been granted. John 12:40 can quote Isaiah 6:10 of Jesus’ ministry, not because he twists the meaning of the OT text, but because he saw that what had happened with God’s messenger before happened again and even <em>ultimately<\/em> in Jesus’ ministry. The instances of such correspondences in history are numerous.<\/p>\n<p>There are other texts where there seems to be an <em>actualization<\/em> of the OT text. Some quotations seem to be “lived out” in the ministry of Jesus. Because of their conviction about Jesus and his kingdom, the NT writers often saw certain OT texts as appropriated and made alive by Jesus. Psalm 118:22 was not intended as a prophecy of the Messiah, but Jesus saw it as descriptive of his ministry (Mt 21:42), and the early church saw this verse as actualized in his death and resurrection (Acts 4:11). Isaiah 53 is another text that the NT views as actualized in Jesus’ ministry (see Acts 8:32-35 and 1 Pt 2:22-25). Some Christians would view Psalm 22 as a prophecy of the crucifixion of Jesus, but it seems instead to be the lament of a righteous OT sufferer. Through correspondence in history, and because Christians saw so much of the psalmist’s plight actualized in Jesus’ crucifixion, the psalm became the easiest way to describe what once again had happened to God’s righteous sufferer. The words of Isaiah 40:3 describe the ministry of John the Baptist (Mt 3:3). Jews had come to see this verse as a prophecy of God’s end-time salvation, and the early church saw John the Baptist fulfilling this forerunner’s task. Luke made this identification (Lk 3:4-6), but he applied the same role to Jesus’ disciples (9:52; 10:1). This seems to be a further example of actualization and correspondence in history. In other places the church has applied to Christians ideas that were previously understood of Christ (e.g., the stone in 1 Pt 2:4-5; the ministry of the Suffering Servant in Acts 13:46-47).<\/p>\n<p>The most convenient term to describe the way the OT is “fulfilled” in Christ is to say that the OT finds its climax in Jesus. Even where actual quotations are not involved, the OT ideas such as prophet, priest, or king are climaxed in him as the ideal and embodiment of all the OT models. He could tell religious authorities that “one greater than Solomon is here” (Mt 12:42) or “one greater than the temple is here” (Mt 12:6). Those passages involving correspondence in history or actualization also lead to the conviction that he is the climax of the OT Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePurposesoftheUseoftheOldTestament\">The Purposes of the Use of the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The variety of methods of interpretation and application of the OT parallels the fact that the OT was used for a variety of purposes. People tend to think only in terms of the use of the OT to show that Jesus was the Messiah, but there are a number of other uses with a variety of goals. Many OT texts are used to show Jesus is the Messiah, the fulfillment of the OT promises (Lk 4:16-21). Without lessening the fulfillment emphasis, however, other verses are applied to Jesus for other purposes: to evangelize (Acts 8:32-25); to demonstrate or convince (Acts 13:33-35); to rebuke (Mk 7:6-7; Rom 11:7-10); and to describe (Rv 1:12-15). On the other hand, many quotations of the OT in the NT are not directly related to the Messiah. OT passages are adapted to provide a word from God on some aspect of life or ethics. For example, Jesus used Genesis 2:24 to substantiate his teaching on divorce as he attempted to deal with the issues raised by the civil regulation of divorce (Dt 24:1; Mt 19:1-12). The stress on the OT commandments shows their importance for Christians (Mt 19:16-22; Rom 13:8-10). Often OT statements deal with specific problems. The problem of pride at Corinth is solved by the quotation of Jeremiah 9:24 (“Let the one boasting, boast in the Lord,” 1 Cor 1:31). First Peter 3:10-12 incorporates Psalm 34:12-16 as ethical instructions, and 3:14-15 borrows from Isaiah 8:12-13 to address the fear of suffering. The spiritual armor in Ephesians 6:14-17 is derived largely from OT passages. Such examples are so numerous that there can be no doubt that the OT is used to describe Christian existence. In fact, nearly every subject discussed in the NT is presented somewhere via OT terms and quotations. Frequently OT passages are used to describe the church as God’s end-time community. Hosea 2:23 is used to show that those who formerly were not God’s people now are (Rom 9:25-26; 1 Pt 2:10). Several OT texts contribute to the description of the church in 1 Peter 2:9. OT texts that speak of the word of God describe the apostles’ preaching (Rom 10:8; 1 Pt 1:24-25). OT quotations describe the sinful condition of humanity (Rom 3:10-20). Salvation is explained through OT concepts and symbols and is based on OT statements (Jn 6:31-33; Gal 3:6-13). The words of Daniel describe the Second Coming (7:13-14; cf. Mt 24:30). Even the worship of early Christians was expressed through use of the OT (see Acts 4:24; Rom 11:34-35).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, Q<span>uotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers.<\/p>\n<p>The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotations in distinctive print, this may not be easily seen, for the NT writers often weave the OT words into their own without indicating they are borrowing from the OT. There are over 400 passages of the OT that are explicitly cited in the NT. Almost half of these are introduced by a statement like “Scripture says” to draw attention to the fact that the authority and thought of the OT is being implemented. For the others, however, the OT words are woven into the fabric of the author’s own statement.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the over 400 passages cited explicitly, there are well over 1,000 places where there is an allusion to an OT text, event, or person. The difference between a quotation and an allusion is sometimes debated for particular texts, but usually the distinction is that in a quotation the author consciously uses the words of an OT passage, whereas with an allusion he has the texts in mind but is not consciously trying to use the words.<\/p>\n<p>Quotations are easy to identify if there is an introductory formula such as “the Scripture says” (as in Rom 10:11; cf. Is 28:16). Where there is no introductory formula, it is easy to overlook explicit quotations (Rom 10:13; cf. Jl 2:32). The allusions are, of course, harder still to recognize, but they often provide the key to interpretation. For example, John 1:14-18—with its mention of glory, grace and truth, Moses, and the fact that no one has seen God—is much more easily and profoundly understood when read in connection with Exodus 33:17–34:8. In the Exodus passage the glory of God and his grace and truth are revealed to Moses. The author was showing that a much more complete revelation of God was given in Jesus than was given Moses in the account recorded in Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, significant light is shed on many NT passages from OT passages with similar ideas and words even where the NT author may not have been consciously alluding to those texts (e.g. Mt 16:19; Is 22:22). What was behind the author’s thinking is not certain, but in such cases the NT reflects the thinking, the culture, and language of the OT period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DistributionofOldTestamentQuotations\">Distribution of Old Testament Quotations<\/p>\n<p>The books of the NT that show the most dependence on the OT are Matthew, John, Romans, Hebrews, 1 Peter, and Revelation. Such a statement can be misleading, however, because the writers have different methods.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew quotes or consciously reflects the wording of OT passages about 62 times, almost half of which have an introductory formula. The book of Revelation, on the other hand, never quotes the OT and never has an introductory formula but is probably more dependent on the OT than any other NT book. The book of Hebrews quotes or consciously reflects the OT about 59 times, again half of which have an introductory formula, but the Gospel of John does so only 18 times, nearly always with an introductory formula. However, the allusions to the OT are present on virtually every page of John’s Gospel, so much so that some scholars have argued that he has modeled his account on the exodus narrative, the Jewish feasts, or OT persons and images. Paul’s Letter to the Romans uses the OT 54 times (about three-fourths of which have introductory formulas), but nowhere else so frequently (e.g., 1 Cor 16 times, Gal 11 times, Phil one time, 1 Thes one time).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the indication that Philippians and 1 Thessalonians use the OT only once each, some other books make explicit use of the OT rarely or never. Colossians, Titus, Philemon, and the Johannine letters do not use the OT at all; 2 Timothy and Jude use the OT only once; while 2 Peter and 1 Timothy make use of it twice.<\/p>\n<p>The important point is to realize that the OT is used most frequently in circumstances where the audience is familiar with the OT or where the OT is essential for describing the events relating to Christ and the church. The books using the OT most frequently (Mt, Jn, Rom, Heb, 1 Pt, Rv) either stem from or are addressed to a Jewish context or, as in the case of Romans and John, deal specifically with the relation of Jews and Christians. The Gospels make rather extensive use of the OT because the language of the OT is necessary to convey the identity and importance of Jesus in the purposes of God. Similarly 1 Peter uses the OT frequently because the author is trying to convey to his persecuted audience that they are the people of God and the inheritors of the promises of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DifficultiesinInterpretation\">Difficulties in Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>Often when people think of quotations of the OT in the NT they think only in terms of prophecy. Some have been guilty of counting up the OT statements that the NT applies to Christ and the church and then claiming these OT texts as predictions that prove Jesus is the Messiah. Such a procedure is filled with problems because it is too simplistic and does not do justice to either the OT or to the way the NT uses it. Of course, the early church used the OT to show that Jesus fulfilled the promises of God and did God’s work, but the use the church made of the OT was quite varied and much of it cannot be classified as predictive prophecy. Prophecy itself is too complex to be limited to predictive thinking.<\/p>\n<p>Some of the most obvious examples of the difficulties appear in Matthew’s Gospel, although they are by no means confined there. Matthew 2:15—“Out of Egypt I called my son”—is a quotation of Hosea 11:1, but in Hosea these words do not refer to the Messiah. They refer to the nation of Israel. Similarly Matthew 2:18 quotes Jeremiah 31:15 (“A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more,” <span>niv<\/span>) as fulfilled in the slaughter of the innocent babies in Bethlehem, but in Jeremiah the weeping is over the destruction of Jerusalem. John 12:40 views Isaiah 6:10 as fulfilled in Jesus’ ministry, but this verse deals with the call of Isaiah and is not a prediction concerning the ministry of the Messiah. The examples could be multiplied but these should be sufficient to illustrate the problem. For this reason the NT writers have often been accused of twisting the Scriptures, but this charge is as simplistic as the thought that all prophecy is predictive and in fact springs from the same error. Therefore, any attempt to understand the use of the OT in the NT will have to deal with the variety of ways in which the OT is used and with the methods employed by the NT writers.<\/p>\n<p>There are other difficulties that are encountered as well. Sometimes the NT writer will indicate that some fact related to Christ is a fulfillment of the OT but the explicit text that he had in mind cannot be identified. For example, John 7:38 introduces the words “Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water” with the statement “as Scripture has said.” No OT text reads this way. Possibly the allusion is to the rock that provided water in the wilderness (Ex 17:1), or to the waters that flowed from the new temple (Zec 14:8) or, more generally, it may be a reference to Isaiah 58:11. Similarly, the difficulty in determining the OT text behind the prophecy that Christ will be called a Nazarene (Mt 2:23) is notorious. Probably the reference is to Isaiah 11:1 and the Hebrew word there translated as “branch,” but the connection is not easily made and is not certain. A third example of this kind of difficulty is in 1 Corinthians 14:34, where Paul indicates that women should be in submission just as the Law says, but there is no OT text expressing this idea. His statement in probably to be understood as a summary rather than a quotation or allusion. Similarly on a few occasions an OT text is seemingly attributed to the wrong OT book. In Mark 1:2-3 an OT quotation is attributed to Isaiah but the quotation is really a conflation (or mixing) of Exodus 23:20, Malachi 3:1, and Isaiah 40:3. Matthew 27:9-10 quotes a passage that is said to be from Jeremiah, when really it is dependent on Zechariah 11:13 and might best be described as a summary of Zechariah 11:12-13, with certain words included from Jeremiah 32:6-9. These two examples do not create a major problem, however, for the determination of the origin of the words may be due to their use in collections of quotations from various prophets, in which case the more prominent prophets would be used to designate origin.<\/p>\n<p>The wording of the quotations of the OT text does not always conform to the modern form of the OT. Just as today there are numerous translations of the Bible, when the NT was being written there were various forms of the OT text. With regard to the Hebrew text (for the OT was written mostly in Hebrew), there were different traditions. Such differences in the Hebrew traditions would have been relatively small. Because of the increasing importance of Aramaic after the Babylonian captivity and of Greek after the conquests of Alexander the Great, the OT was also known and used in both these languages when the NT was being written. In fact, the Jews found it necessary in their synagogue services after reading the Hebrew OT to paraphrase the reading in Aramaic so that all could understand. These paraphrases were later written down and are known as Targums. The Greek translation of the OT that stems from the third century <span>BC<\/span> is known as the Septuagint, but there were also other Greek translations in use. This being the case, the wording of a NT quotation is not identical in every detail to the text of the Hebrew OT.<\/p>\n<p>Added to the fact that there were various forms of the text known in first-century <span>AD<\/span> Palestine is the complicating factor that NT writers often did not intend to quote the OT exactly. The use of formal quotation marks is a modern device, and ancient writers were not so taken by technical precision. They were more concerned with the intention of a text and consequently might copy or quote it verbatim, quote it from memory, use or adapt part of a verse, or even change certain words as they borrowed the verse to express their points. (The NT writers often use the OT words describing God’s actions in the past to explain what he has done in their time.) The importance of any differences between the NT quotation and the OT depends on the use to which the quotation is put and the degree to which the use is dependent on textual differences.<\/p>\n<p>Some examples should illustrate the nature of these difficulties. Ephesians 4:8 quotes Psalm 68:18. Whereas the Hebrew and Septuagint read, “You ascended to the heights, you lead captivity captive, you received gifts among mankind,” Ephesians records the verse as “After he ascended into the heights, <em>he<\/em> led captivity captive; he <em>gave<\/em> gifts to men.” Paul is stressing that Christ has given grace to people for ministry. He has either adapted the wording of the OT to make his point or he quoted a variant reading, <em>“he gave<\/em> gifts.” Some versions do have this reading. In fact, the Targum understands this verse as Moses giving the words of the law to the children of men, and Paul may well be adapting this understanding to the new revelation that has come in Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 1:23 quotes Isaiah 7:14, but there are distinct differences between the Hebrew text and the wording in Matthew. The Hebrew reads, “Behold the young woman will become pregnant and will bear a son and you will call his name Immanuel,” whereas Matthew’s text records “Behold, the <em>virgin<\/em> will become pregnant and will bear a son, and <em>they<\/em> will call his name Immanuel.” The Septuagint does have the specific word “virgin,” like Matthew, but is not the source of Matthew’s quotation since other differences exist. Some have argued that the change from “you will call” to “they will call” was made by Matthew when he applied the words to Jesus. However, there are several traditions known for this part of the quotation and partial support for the reading in Matthew is provided by the text of Isaiah found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>Romans 11:26-27 is a conflation of Isaiah 59:20-21 and part of Isaiah 27:9, but there are important differences. One of these is that the OT has “the redeemer will come to Zion,” whereas Romans has “the deliverer will come <em>from<\/em> Zion.” The change to “from Zion” could indicate that Paul had a different textual tradition, could be the result of an intentional change by Paul, or more probably, could reflect the wording of Psalm 14:7.<\/p>\n<p>An awareness of the difficulties involved in the quotations of the OT by the NT writers will prohibit a simplistic approach and will prevent hasty conclusions. Care to ask not only which text was used but also which form of the text was used and how is obviously essential in any serious study. In addition it is necessary to allow for the possibility that the NT writers knew forms of a text that are now lost.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMethodsoftheNewTestamentWriters\">The Methods of the New Testament Writers<\/p>\n<p>The methods used by the NT writers were not unique to them. Many of these methods were also employed in first-century Judaism. In fact, both the technique used in quoting and the understanding of the OT text itself in many cases are paralleled in Judaism. For example, from the standpoint of technique used in quoting, the same kinds of formula introductions are used in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the rabbinic writings, and elsewhere. The rabbinic technique of “pearl stringing,” that is, of applying verses from various parts of the OT (the Law, the Prophets, the Writings) to a subject, can be seen especially in Paul’s writings (note Rom 9:12-19 or 11:8-10). Somewhat related is the practice of using quotations that all contain a key word or key words (note 1 Pt 2:6-8, which draws together quotations using the word “stone,” or Rom 15:9-12, which joins OT verses referring to the “nations”).<\/p>\n<p>The methods used in the NT to interpret an OT text are also displayed in Judaism. Some passages interpret the OT “literally,” such as Jesus’ replies during temptation (see the quotations of Dt 8:3; 6:16; 6:13; in Mt 4:3-10), his teachings on marriage based on Genesis 2:24 (Mt 19:5), or Paul’s use of Habakkuk 2:4 (Rom 1:17) or Genesis 15:6 (Rom 4:3-9). Many such examples could be given. With regard to prophecy, some of these statements are fulfilled in a “literal” or “direct” way in keeping with the intention of the OT (e.g., Mi 5:2, Bethlehem as the birthplace of the Messiah; Mt 2:4-6). Jeremiah 31:31-34, the promise of the new covenant, is viewed as directly fulfilled in Christ (Heb 8:7-13). The prophecy of Joel 2:28-32 concerning the pouring out of the Spirit of the Lord is directly fulfilled in the Pentecost event (Acts 2:17-21), but the changing of the sun to darkness and the moon to blood are certainly not understood literally in connection with this event.<\/p>\n<p>A different method of interpretation is based on the concept of <em>corporate solidarity.<\/em> This technical expression is an attempt to convey the idea that the individuals among God’s people are not merely individuals; they are part of a larger whole. Consequently, what is said about the individual can apply to the whole and vice versa. This is the reason the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah is seen both as the nation (44:1) and as an individual (52:13–53:12). Also the king is sometimes viewed as representative of the nation. The easiest places to see the concept of corporate solidarity are in the effect of the sin of Achan on all the people (Jos 7) or the sin of David in numbering the people (1 Chr 21:3-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>Correspondence in history<\/em> is not so much a method of interpretation as it is a way of thinking about God. It assumes that the things that happen to God’s people are the things that have happened to previous generations and that God is faithful and operates in the present as he has in the past. Consequently, the trials and deliverance of God’s people are often expressed with words borrowed from the previous accounts of God’s people. Isaiah describes the anticipated deliverance in terms of a second exodus (11:15-16). Ezekiel describes the king set up over the people in terms of a second David (Ez 37:25). In the NT, Revelation 22 describes the new heavens and the new earth in terms of the Garden of Eden (Gn 2–3). Sometimes this technique is described as “typology,” but this term has been used for so many questionable interpretations that it is misleading. The most important thing about this concept is that it is a view of God and his working among his people.<\/p>\n<p>With these two concepts, the way that the OT is quoted in the NT can be understood. The conviction that Jesus was the promised deliverer and that the last days had dawned in his ministry are evident everywhere. The quotation of Hosea 11:1 can be used in Matthew 2:15 because of corporate solidarity and correspondence in history. What was said of the nation is true of the one who is its representative, and there is correspondence in their respective histories. Jeremiah 31:15 can be used in Matthew 2:18 because of correspondence in history and especially because Jeremiah looked forward to God’s intention for Israel and prophesied a new covenant (31:17, 31-34). Matthew saw not only the correspondence in history but believed that in Jesus this promised salvation had been granted. John 12:40 can quote Isaiah 6:10 of Jesus’ ministry, not because he twists the meaning of the OT text, but because he saw that what had happened with God’s messenger before happened again and even <em>ultimately<\/em> in Jesus’ ministry. The instances of such correspondences in history are numerous.<\/p>\n<p>There are other texts where there seems to be an <em>actualization<\/em> of the OT text. Some quotations seem to be “lived out” in the ministry of Jesus. Because of their conviction about Jesus and his kingdom, the NT writers often saw certain OT texts as appropriated and made alive by Jesus. Psalm 118:22 was not intended as a prophecy of the Messiah, but Jesus saw it as descriptive of his ministry (Mt 21:42), and the early church saw this verse as actualized in his death and resurrection (Acts 4:11). Isaiah 53 is another text that the NT views as actualized in Jesus’ ministry (see Acts 8:32-35 and 1 Pt 2:22-25). Some Christians would view Psalm 22 as a prophecy of the crucifixion of Jesus, but it seems instead to be the lament of a righteous OT sufferer. Through correspondence in history, and because Christians saw so much of the psalmist’s plight actualized in Jesus’ crucifixion, the psalm became the easiest way to describe what once again had happened to God’s righteous sufferer. The words of Isaiah 40:3 describe the ministry of John the Baptist (Mt 3:3). Jews had come to see this verse as a prophecy of God’s end-time salvation, and the early church saw John the Baptist fulfilling this forerunner’s task. Luke made this identification (Lk 3:4-6), but he applied the same role to Jesus’ disciples (9:52; 10:1). This seems to be a further example of actualization and correspondence in history. In other places the church has applied to Christians ideas that were previously understood of Christ (e.g., the stone in 1 Pt 2:4-5; the ministry of the Suffering Servant in Acts 13:46-47).<\/p>\n<p>The most convenient term to describe the way the OT is “fulfilled” in Christ is to say that the OT finds its climax in Jesus. Even where actual quotations are not involved, the OT ideas such as prophet, priest, or king are climaxed in him as the ideal and embodiment of all the OT models. He could tell religious authorities that “one greater than Solomon is here” (Mt 12:42) or “one greater than the temple is here” (Mt 12:6). Those passages involving correspondence in history or actualization also lead to the conviction that he is the climax of the OT Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePurposesoftheUseoftheOldTestament\">The Purposes of the Use of the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The variety of methods of interpretation and application of the OT parallels the fact that the OT was used for a variety of purposes. People tend to think only in terms of the use of the OT to show that Jesus was the Messiah, but there are a number of other uses with a variety of goals. Many OT texts are used to show Jesus is the Messiah, the fulfillment of the OT promises (Lk 4:16-21). Without lessening the fulfillment emphasis, however, other verses are applied to Jesus for other purposes: to evangelize (Acts 8:32-25); to demonstrate or convince (Acts 13:33-35); to rebuke (Mk 7:6-7; Rom 11:7-10); and to describe (Rv 1:12-15). On the other hand, many quotations of the OT in the NT are not directly related to the Messiah. OT passages are adapted to provide a word from God on some aspect of life or ethics. For example, Jesus used Genesis 2:24 to substantiate his teaching on divorce as he attempted to deal with the issues raised by the civil regulation of divorce (Dt 24:1; Mt 19:1-12). The stress on the OT commandments shows their importance for Christians (Mt 19:16-22; Rom 13:8-10). Often OT statements deal with specific problems. The problem of pride at Corinth is solved by the quotation of Jeremiah 9:24 (“Let the one boasting, boast in the Lord,” 1 Cor 1:31). First Peter 3:10-12 incorporates Psalm 34:12-16 as ethical instructions, and 3:14-15 borrows from Isaiah 8:12-13 to address the fear of suffering. The spiritual armor in Ephesians 6:14-17 is derived largely from OT passages. Such examples are so numerous that there can be no doubt that the OT is used to describe Christian existence. In fact, nearly every subject discussed in the NT is presented somewhere via OT terms and quotations. Frequently OT passages are used to describe the church as God’s end-time community. Hosea 2:23 is used to show that those who formerly were not God’s people now are (Rom 9:25-26; 1 Pt 2:10). Several OT texts contribute to the description of the church in 1 Peter 2:9. OT texts that speak of the word of God describe the apostles’ preaching (Rom 10:8; 1 Pt 1:24-25). OT quotations describe the sinful condition of humanity (Rom 3:10-20). Salvation is explained through OT concepts and symbols and is based on OT statements (Jn 6:31-33; Gal 3:6-13). The words of Daniel describe the Second Coming (7:13-14; cf. Mt 24:30). Even the worship of early Christians was expressed through use of the OT (see Acts 4:24; Rom 11:34-35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings. One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers. The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotation...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings. One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers. The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotation...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9401,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Desert","title_en":"Desert","content_ro":"<h3>DESERT<\/h3>\n\n<p>Empty waste place, often arid, sandy, and incapable of sustaining vegetable life, as for example the Negev of southern Palestine. A desert frequently includes local areas where marginal life is possible. The most common Hebrew term for desert means “wilderness” and is perhaps related to a verb meaning “to drive,” as a shepherd drives sheep to pasturage. The Greek word commonly used in the NT and in the Septuagint (ancient Greek translation of the OT) implies an unenclosed, uncultivated area where wild beasts roam (Dt 32:10; Jb 24:5). The wilderness is also sometimes a place of pasturage (Ex 3:1; Ps 65:12; Jer 23:10; Jl 2:22).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible often refers to wilderness regions (e.g., Gn 16:7; 21:20; 1 Sm 17:28; Mt 3:1; Mk 1:13; Lk 15:4). “Wilderness” is usually a place with no settled population (Nm 14:33; Dt 32:10; Jb 38:26; Prv 21:19; Jer 9:2) but is the dwelling place of wildlife: the vulture (Ps 102:6), wild asses (Jb 24:5), jackals (Mal 1:3), and ostriches (Lam 4:3). The term is also used figuratively (Hos 2:3; Jer 2:31).<\/p>\n<p>Another Hebrew term for desert, from a root meaning “to be arid,” refers to an infertile, desolate, bare steppe (Jb 24:5; Is 33:9; Jer 51:43). The plural form of that word describes topographical features of the desert plains of Moab (Nm 22:1; 26:3, 63; Dt 34:1) and of Jericho (Jos 4:13; 5:10; 2 Kgs 25:5). With the definite article, that word (the Arabah) is the plain of the Jordan Valley and of the environs of the Dead Sea. The geography of that region contains sharp contrasts; the Jordan Valley, dense with a junglelike forest sheltering wild beasts (including lions in biblical times), gives way to the steppe lands of the Dead Sea area, which have always been desert.<\/p>\n<p>Two other Hebrew terms, meaning “waste” and “ruin,” refer to districts or settlements once inhabited but later devastated (Is 1:7; 5:9; 6:11; Jer 42:18; Ez 35:7). They are also used more generally for any desolate or waste place (Lv 26:31, 33; Jb 3:14; Pss 9:6; 109:10; Is 5:17; 44:26; 51:3; 52:9; Jer 7:34; Ez 5:14). One of them is also used once for the wilderness of the exodus (Is 48:21). Another word meaning “waste” (Ps 78:40; Is 43:19-20), when prefixed with the definite article, is a proper name for Jeshimon, a tract of land west of the Dead Sea (Nm 21:20; 1 Sm 23:24; 26:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the noun for “wilderness” and the adjective “desert” (Mt 3:1; 24:26; Lk 5:16; Jn 6:31; Acts 8:26) come from the same Greek root.<\/p>\n<p>The whole of biblical history has been interpreted as having a desert or wilderness motif. It can be seen in the realm of disobedient human experience outside the Garden of Eden; in the wandering of Israel during the exodus; in the struggle between pure faith in the desert and soft, idolatrous city life. The desert is viewed as a realm of demons and death (Dt 32:17; Is 34:13-14); its demonic wildness resembles the primeval chaos of the Creation (Gn 1:2; Jb 26:7). Several moving passages of Scripture deal with renewal of life in a desert valley (e.g., Ez 37), or with transformation of arid land into a productive garden (Is 41:18-20).<\/p>\n<p>The desert is also a place where God is close to his people (Dt 32:10-12), both watching over them and testing their obedience (Jer 2:2; Hos 2:14-15). Finally, the desert is a place of refuge, cleansing, and consecration. In the Gospels the desert theme of the exodus recurs in the 40 days and nights in which Jesus was tempted in the wilderness (Mk 1:13; cf. Ps 91). The desert fathers of the early church and the hermits of the Middle Ages emulated the prophet Elijah and John the Baptist (1 Kgs 19:4-8; Mt 3:1-6).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Negeb, Negev; Palestine; Wilderness.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DESERT<\/h3>\n\n<p>Empty waste place, often arid, sandy, and incapable of sustaining vegetable life, as for example the Negev of southern Palestine. A desert frequently includes local areas where marginal life is possible. The most common Hebrew term for desert means “wilderness” and is perhaps related to a verb meaning “to drive,” as a shepherd drives sheep to pasturage. The Greek word commonly used in the NT and in the Septuagint (ancient Greek translation of the OT) implies an unenclosed, uncultivated area where wild beasts roam (Dt 32:10; Jb 24:5). The wilderness is also sometimes a place of pasturage (Ex 3:1; Ps 65:12; Jer 23:10; Jl 2:22).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible often refers to wilderness regions (e.g., Gn 16:7; 21:20; 1 Sm 17:28; Mt 3:1; Mk 1:13; Lk 15:4). “Wilderness” is usually a place with no settled population (Nm 14:33; Dt 32:10; Jb 38:26; Prv 21:19; Jer 9:2) but is the dwelling place of wildlife: the vulture (Ps 102:6), wild asses (Jb 24:5), jackals (Mal 1:3), and ostriches (Lam 4:3). The term is also used figuratively (Hos 2:3; Jer 2:31).<\/p>\n<p>Another Hebrew term for desert, from a root meaning “to be arid,” refers to an infertile, desolate, bare steppe (Jb 24:5; Is 33:9; Jer 51:43). The plural form of that word describes topographical features of the desert plains of Moab (Nm 22:1; 26:3, 63; Dt 34:1) and of Jericho (Jos 4:13; 5:10; 2 Kgs 25:5). With the definite article, that word (the Arabah) is the plain of the Jordan Valley and of the environs of the Dead Sea. The geography of that region contains sharp contrasts; the Jordan Valley, dense with a junglelike forest sheltering wild beasts (including lions in biblical times), gives way to the steppe lands of the Dead Sea area, which have always been desert.<\/p>\n<p>Two other Hebrew terms, meaning “waste” and “ruin,” refer to districts or settlements once inhabited but later devastated (Is 1:7; 5:9; 6:11; Jer 42:18; Ez 35:7). They are also used more generally for any desolate or waste place (Lv 26:31, 33; Jb 3:14; Pss 9:6; 109:10; Is 5:17; 44:26; 51:3; 52:9; Jer 7:34; Ez 5:14). One of them is also used once for the wilderness of the exodus (Is 48:21). Another word meaning “waste” (Ps 78:40; Is 43:19-20), when prefixed with the definite article, is a proper name for Jeshimon, a tract of land west of the Dead Sea (Nm 21:20; 1 Sm 23:24; 26:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the noun for “wilderness” and the adjective “desert” (Mt 3:1; 24:26; Lk 5:16; Jn 6:31; Acts 8:26) come from the same Greek root.<\/p>\n<p>The whole of biblical history has been interpreted as having a desert or wilderness motif. It can be seen in the realm of disobedient human experience outside the Garden of Eden; in the wandering of Israel during the exodus; in the struggle between pure faith in the desert and soft, idolatrous city life. The desert is viewed as a realm of demons and death (Dt 32:17; Is 34:13-14); its demonic wildness resembles the primeval chaos of the Creation (Gn 1:2; Jb 26:7). Several moving passages of Scripture deal with renewal of life in a desert valley (e.g., Ez 37), or with transformation of arid land into a productive garden (Is 41:18-20).<\/p>\n<p>The desert is also a place where God is close to his people (Dt 32:10-12), both watching over them and testing their obedience (Jer 2:2; Hos 2:14-15). Finally, the desert is a place of refuge, cleansing, and consecration. In the Gospels the desert theme of the exodus recurs in the 40 days and nights in which Jesus was tempted in the wilderness (Mk 1:13; cf. Ps 91). The desert fathers of the early church and the hermits of the Middle Ages emulated the prophet Elijah and John the Baptist (1 Kgs 19:4-8; Mt 3:1-6).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Negeb, Negev; Palestine; Wilderness.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DESERT Empty waste place, often arid, sandy, and incapable of sustaining vegetable life, as for example the Negev of southern Palestine. A desert frequently includes local areas where marginal life is possible. The most common Hebrew term for desert means “wilderness” and is perhaps related to a verb meaning “to drive,” as a shepherd drives sheep to pasturage. The Greek word commonly used in the NT and in the Septuagint (ancient Greek translation of the OT) implies an unenclosed, uncultivated...","summary_en":"DESERT Empty waste place, often arid, sandy, and incapable of sustaining vegetable life, as for example the Negev of southern Palestine. A desert frequently includes local areas where marginal life is possible. The most common Hebrew term for desert means “wilderness” and is perhaps related to a verb meaning “to drive,” as a shepherd drives sheep to pasturage. The Greek word commonly used in the NT and in the Septuagint (ancient Greek translation of the OT) implies an unenclosed, uncultivated...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"32":[{"id":56442,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:32","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:32","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:32-33<\/strong> Jesus corrected the people’s argument: God, not Moses, fed Israel in the wilderness. The most important quest is to find and consume <em>the true bread of God<\/em><em>,<\/em> who gives eternal life.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:32-33<\/strong> Jesus corrected the people’s argument: God, not Moses, fed Israel in the wilderness. The most important quest is to find and consume <em>the true bread of God<\/em><em>,<\/em> who gives eternal life.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:32-33 Jesus corrected the people’s argument: God, not Moses, fed Israel in the wilderness. The most important quest is to find and consume the true bread of God, who gives eternal life.","summary_en":"6:32-33 Jesus corrected the people’s argument: God, not Moses, fed Israel in the wilderness. The most important quest is to find and consume the true bread of God, who gives eternal life.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84068,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:32","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:32","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:32-33<\/strong> Jesus corrected the people’s argument: God, not Moses, fed Israel in the wilderness. The most important quest is to find and consume <em>the true bread of God<\/em><em>,<\/em> who gives eternal life.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:32-33<\/strong> Jesus corrected the people’s argument: God, not Moses, fed Israel in the wilderness. The most important quest is to find and consume <em>the true bread of God<\/em><em>,<\/em> who gives eternal life.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:32-33 Jesus corrected the people’s argument: God, not Moses, fed Israel in the wilderness. The most important quest is to find and consume the true bread of God, who gives eternal life.","summary_en":"6:32-33 Jesus corrected the people’s argument: God, not Moses, fed Israel in the wilderness. The most important quest is to find and consume the true bread of God, who gives eternal life.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111694,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:32","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:32","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:32-33<\/strong> Jesus corrected the people’s argument: God, not Moses, fed Israel in the wilderness. The most important quest is to find and consume <em>the true bread of God<\/em><em>,<\/em> who gives eternal life.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:32-33<\/strong> Jesus corrected the people’s argument: God, not Moses, fed Israel in the wilderness. The most important quest is to find and consume <em>the true bread of God<\/em><em>,<\/em> who gives eternal life.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:32-33 Jesus corrected the people’s argument: God, not Moses, fed Israel in the wilderness. The most important quest is to find and consume the true bread of God, who gives eternal life.","summary_en":"6:32-33 Jesus corrected the people’s argument: God, not Moses, fed Israel in the wilderness. The most important quest is to find and consume the true bread of God, who gives eternal life.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139320,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:32","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:32","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:32-33<\/strong> Jesus corrected the people’s argument: God, not Moses, fed Israel in the wilderness. The most important quest is to find and consume <em>the true bread of God<\/em><em>,<\/em> who gives eternal life.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:32-33<\/strong> Jesus corrected the people’s argument: God, not Moses, fed Israel in the wilderness. The most important quest is to find and consume <em>the true bread of God<\/em><em>,<\/em> who gives eternal life.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:32-33 Jesus corrected the people’s argument: God, not Moses, fed Israel in the wilderness. The most important quest is to find and consume the true bread of God, who gives eternal life.","summary_en":"6:32-33 Jesus corrected the people’s argument: God, not Moses, fed Israel in the wilderness. The most important quest is to find and consume the true bread of God, who gives eternal life.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60150,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Famine","title_en":"Famine","content_ro":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","summary_en":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60603,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60697,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Bronze Snake","title_en":"The Bronze Snake","content_ro":"<h3>The Bronze Snake<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to make a bronze replica of a snake; whenever the afflicted would look upon the snake, they would be healed (Num 21:8). What kind of medical treatment was this? The power came from God, but it required an act of faith to look at the bronze image and trust that God would heal. Just as the serpent bites resulted from God’s wrath, the Lord provided deliverance through his own gracious will (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 16:5-7).<\/p>\n<p>When Hezekiah became king of Judah in 715 <span>BC<\/span>, the Israelites had begun using Moses’ bronze serpent as an idol (see 2 Kgs 18:1-4). They had probably kept the image as a reminder of God’s power, just as they kept other artifacts from the wilderness period (see Deut 10:5; Heb 9:4-5). But they began worshiping it as another deity, so it had to be destroyed like other pagan shrines and sacred pillars. Such idolatry is a serious threat to the worship of the one true God (cp. Exod 32).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus referred to the incident of the bronze snake to predict the manner of his execution: He would be “lifted up” on the cross just as Moses had lifted up the snake on a pole (John 3:14-15; see also 8:28; 12:32-33). The metal image of a snake offered an antidote to injected venom; by analogy, those who look at the cross and accept God’s sacrifice lay claim to an eternal promise (John 3:14-16). The Lord sent the serpents to punish Israel because they complained about the manna God had sent them in the wilderness (Num 21:4-9). Jesus referred to himself as the “true bread from heaven,” the manna that provides life for his people (John 6:32-40).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 21:4-9; 2 Kgs 18:1-4; John 3:14-15; 6:32-40; 8:28; 12:30-34<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Bronze Snake<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to make a bronze replica of a snake; whenever the afflicted would look upon the snake, they would be healed (Num 21:8). What kind of medical treatment was this? The power came from God, but it required an act of faith to look at the bronze image and trust that God would heal. Just as the serpent bites resulted from God’s wrath, the Lord provided deliverance through his own gracious will (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 16:5-7).<\/p>\n<p>When Hezekiah became king of Judah in 715 <span>BC<\/span>, the Israelites had begun using Moses’ bronze serpent as an idol (see 2 Kgs 18:1-4). They had probably kept the image as a reminder of God’s power, just as they kept other artifacts from the wilderness period (see Deut 10:5; Heb 9:4-5). But they began worshiping it as another deity, so it had to be destroyed like other pagan shrines and sacred pillars. Such idolatry is a serious threat to the worship of the one true God (cp. Exod 32).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus referred to the incident of the bronze snake to predict the manner of his execution: He would be “lifted up” on the cross just as Moses had lifted up the snake on a pole (John 3:14-15; see also 8:28; 12:32-33). The metal image of a snake offered an antidote to injected venom; by analogy, those who look at the cross and accept God’s sacrifice lay claim to an eternal promise (John 3:14-16). The Lord sent the serpents to punish Israel because they complained about the manna God had sent them in the wilderness (Num 21:4-9). Jesus referred to himself as the “true bread from heaven,” the manna that provides life for his people (John 6:32-40).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 21:4-9; 2 Kgs 18:1-4; John 3:14-15; 6:32-40; 8:28; 12:30-34<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Bronze Snake Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to mak...","summary_en":"The Bronze Snake Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to mak...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87776,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Famine","title_en":"Famine","content_ro":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","summary_en":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88229,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88323,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Bronze Snake","title_en":"The Bronze Snake","content_ro":"<h3>The Bronze Snake<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to make a bronze replica of a snake; whenever the afflicted would look upon the snake, they would be healed (Num 21:8). What kind of medical treatment was this? The power came from God, but it required an act of faith to look at the bronze image and trust that God would heal. Just as the serpent bites resulted from God’s wrath, the Lord provided deliverance through his own gracious will (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 16:5-7).<\/p>\n<p>When Hezekiah became king of Judah in 715 <span>BC<\/span>, the Israelites had begun using Moses’ bronze serpent as an idol (see 2 Kgs 18:1-4). They had probably kept the image as a reminder of God’s power, just as they kept other artifacts from the wilderness period (see Deut 10:5; Heb 9:4-5). But they began worshiping it as another deity, so it had to be destroyed like other pagan shrines and sacred pillars. Such idolatry is a serious threat to the worship of the one true God (cp. Exod 32).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus referred to the incident of the bronze snake to predict the manner of his execution: He would be “lifted up” on the cross just as Moses had lifted up the snake on a pole (John 3:14-15; see also 8:28; 12:32-33). The metal image of a snake offered an antidote to injected venom; by analogy, those who look at the cross and accept God’s sacrifice lay claim to an eternal promise (John 3:14-16). The Lord sent the serpents to punish Israel because they complained about the manna God had sent them in the wilderness (Num 21:4-9). Jesus referred to himself as the “true bread from heaven,” the manna that provides life for his people (John 6:32-40).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 21:4-9; 2 Kgs 18:1-4; John 3:14-15; 6:32-40; 8:28; 12:30-34<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Bronze Snake<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to make a bronze replica of a snake; whenever the afflicted would look upon the snake, they would be healed (Num 21:8). What kind of medical treatment was this? The power came from God, but it required an act of faith to look at the bronze image and trust that God would heal. Just as the serpent bites resulted from God’s wrath, the Lord provided deliverance through his own gracious will (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 16:5-7).<\/p>\n<p>When Hezekiah became king of Judah in 715 <span>BC<\/span>, the Israelites had begun using Moses’ bronze serpent as an idol (see 2 Kgs 18:1-4). They had probably kept the image as a reminder of God’s power, just as they kept other artifacts from the wilderness period (see Deut 10:5; Heb 9:4-5). But they began worshiping it as another deity, so it had to be destroyed like other pagan shrines and sacred pillars. Such idolatry is a serious threat to the worship of the one true God (cp. Exod 32).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus referred to the incident of the bronze snake to predict the manner of his execution: He would be “lifted up” on the cross just as Moses had lifted up the snake on a pole (John 3:14-15; see also 8:28; 12:32-33). The metal image of a snake offered an antidote to injected venom; by analogy, those who look at the cross and accept God’s sacrifice lay claim to an eternal promise (John 3:14-16). The Lord sent the serpents to punish Israel because they complained about the manna God had sent them in the wilderness (Num 21:4-9). Jesus referred to himself as the “true bread from heaven,” the manna that provides life for his people (John 6:32-40).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 21:4-9; 2 Kgs 18:1-4; John 3:14-15; 6:32-40; 8:28; 12:30-34<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Bronze Snake Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to mak...","summary_en":"The Bronze Snake Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to mak...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115402,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Famine","title_en":"Famine","content_ro":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","summary_en":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115855,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115949,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Bronze Snake","title_en":"The Bronze Snake","content_ro":"<h3>The Bronze Snake<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to make a bronze replica of a snake; whenever the afflicted would look upon the snake, they would be healed (Num 21:8). What kind of medical treatment was this? The power came from God, but it required an act of faith to look at the bronze image and trust that God would heal. Just as the serpent bites resulted from God’s wrath, the Lord provided deliverance through his own gracious will (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 16:5-7).<\/p>\n<p>When Hezekiah became king of Judah in 715 <span>BC<\/span>, the Israelites had begun using Moses’ bronze serpent as an idol (see 2 Kgs 18:1-4). They had probably kept the image as a reminder of God’s power, just as they kept other artifacts from the wilderness period (see Deut 10:5; Heb 9:4-5). But they began worshiping it as another deity, so it had to be destroyed like other pagan shrines and sacred pillars. Such idolatry is a serious threat to the worship of the one true God (cp. Exod 32).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus referred to the incident of the bronze snake to predict the manner of his execution: He would be “lifted up” on the cross just as Moses had lifted up the snake on a pole (John 3:14-15; see also 8:28; 12:32-33). The metal image of a snake offered an antidote to injected venom; by analogy, those who look at the cross and accept God’s sacrifice lay claim to an eternal promise (John 3:14-16). The Lord sent the serpents to punish Israel because they complained about the manna God had sent them in the wilderness (Num 21:4-9). Jesus referred to himself as the “true bread from heaven,” the manna that provides life for his people (John 6:32-40).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 21:4-9; 2 Kgs 18:1-4; John 3:14-15; 6:32-40; 8:28; 12:30-34<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Bronze Snake<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to make a bronze replica of a snake; whenever the afflicted would look upon the snake, they would be healed (Num 21:8). What kind of medical treatment was this? The power came from God, but it required an act of faith to look at the bronze image and trust that God would heal. Just as the serpent bites resulted from God’s wrath, the Lord provided deliverance through his own gracious will (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 16:5-7).<\/p>\n<p>When Hezekiah became king of Judah in 715 <span>BC<\/span>, the Israelites had begun using Moses’ bronze serpent as an idol (see 2 Kgs 18:1-4). They had probably kept the image as a reminder of God’s power, just as they kept other artifacts from the wilderness period (see Deut 10:5; Heb 9:4-5). But they began worshiping it as another deity, so it had to be destroyed like other pagan shrines and sacred pillars. Such idolatry is a serious threat to the worship of the one true God (cp. Exod 32).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus referred to the incident of the bronze snake to predict the manner of his execution: He would be “lifted up” on the cross just as Moses had lifted up the snake on a pole (John 3:14-15; see also 8:28; 12:32-33). The metal image of a snake offered an antidote to injected venom; by analogy, those who look at the cross and accept God’s sacrifice lay claim to an eternal promise (John 3:14-16). The Lord sent the serpents to punish Israel because they complained about the manna God had sent them in the wilderness (Num 21:4-9). Jesus referred to himself as the “true bread from heaven,” the manna that provides life for his people (John 6:32-40).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 21:4-9; 2 Kgs 18:1-4; John 3:14-15; 6:32-40; 8:28; 12:30-34<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Bronze Snake Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to mak...","summary_en":"The Bronze Snake Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to mak...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143028,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Famine","title_en":"Famine","content_ro":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Famine<\/h3>\n<p>Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25:1-30), it was often accompanied by disease or war that brought adversity at many levels of society (Jer 14:12), including for animals (Joel 1:20). Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile food against possible famine (Gen 41:33-36; 47:23-24; cp. 1 Chr 26:15; 2 Chr 31:11; Neh 10:37-39). Famines had far-reaching results in price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen 12:10; 26:1; 2 Kgs 6:24-29; Neh 5:1-3; Jer 19:9; Lam 2:20-21; 4:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Famine was sometimes a divine judgment on the Israelites (Lev 26:14-20; Deut 11:16-17; 28:33; Jer 29:17-18). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid need (Ps 33:18-19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included protection from famine (Ezek 34:29; 36:29-30).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus relived Israel’s experience of famine in his own wilderness testing and refused to make bread just for himself (Matt 4:1-4; cp. Deut 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger can develop humility and trust in divine providence. Jesus fed five thousand to draw them to himself as the bread of life, God’s true manna (John 6:32-35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for who he is (John 6:26-27). Without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted spiritual hunger and thirst (Luke 6:21; John 4:34). Eating provides both a context and a metaphor for fellowship (Gen 43:34; Luke 22:15-16; Rev 19:9). Heaven will remove the desperation of hunger altogether (Rev 7:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:10; 26:1; 41:33-36, 56-57; 45:6-7; Lev 26:19-20; Deut 8:3; 11:16-17; Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; 2 Kgs 8:1-2; Jer 14:11-16; Ezek 34:29-31; 36:28-32; Joel 1:1-20; Amos 8:11-14; Hag 1:1-11; Luke 6:21; John 6:32-35; Acts 11:28-30; Rev 7:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","summary_en":"Famine Famine occurred early in the lives of Abraham (Gen 12:10) and Isaac (26:1). When famine afflicted Jacob’s family (41:56–42:5), God had already placed Joseph in Egypt to provide for his people through the disaster (45:5, 7). This famine was particularly severe, but famines were not uncommon in the ancient world (see Ruth 1:1; 2 Sam 21:1; 1 Kgs 18:1-2; Hag 1:1-11; Acts 11:28). Famine was a devastating catastrophe in an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (2 Kgs 25...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143481,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143575,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Bronze Snake","title_en":"The Bronze Snake","content_ro":"<h3>The Bronze Snake<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to make a bronze replica of a snake; whenever the afflicted would look upon the snake, they would be healed (Num 21:8). What kind of medical treatment was this? The power came from God, but it required an act of faith to look at the bronze image and trust that God would heal. Just as the serpent bites resulted from God’s wrath, the Lord provided deliverance through his own gracious will (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 16:5-7).<\/p>\n<p>When Hezekiah became king of Judah in 715 <span>BC<\/span>, the Israelites had begun using Moses’ bronze serpent as an idol (see 2 Kgs 18:1-4). They had probably kept the image as a reminder of God’s power, just as they kept other artifacts from the wilderness period (see Deut 10:5; Heb 9:4-5). But they began worshiping it as another deity, so it had to be destroyed like other pagan shrines and sacred pillars. Such idolatry is a serious threat to the worship of the one true God (cp. Exod 32).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus referred to the incident of the bronze snake to predict the manner of his execution: He would be “lifted up” on the cross just as Moses had lifted up the snake on a pole (John 3:14-15; see also 8:28; 12:32-33). The metal image of a snake offered an antidote to injected venom; by analogy, those who look at the cross and accept God’s sacrifice lay claim to an eternal promise (John 3:14-16). The Lord sent the serpents to punish Israel because they complained about the manna God had sent them in the wilderness (Num 21:4-9). Jesus referred to himself as the “true bread from heaven,” the manna that provides life for his people (John 6:32-40).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 21:4-9; 2 Kgs 18:1-4; John 3:14-15; 6:32-40; 8:28; 12:30-34<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Bronze Snake<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to make a bronze replica of a snake; whenever the afflicted would look upon the snake, they would be healed (Num 21:8). What kind of medical treatment was this? The power came from God, but it required an act of faith to look at the bronze image and trust that God would heal. Just as the serpent bites resulted from God’s wrath, the Lord provided deliverance through his own gracious will (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 16:5-7).<\/p>\n<p>When Hezekiah became king of Judah in 715 <span>BC<\/span>, the Israelites had begun using Moses’ bronze serpent as an idol (see 2 Kgs 18:1-4). They had probably kept the image as a reminder of God’s power, just as they kept other artifacts from the wilderness period (see Deut 10:5; Heb 9:4-5). But they began worshiping it as another deity, so it had to be destroyed like other pagan shrines and sacred pillars. Such idolatry is a serious threat to the worship of the one true God (cp. Exod 32).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus referred to the incident of the bronze snake to predict the manner of his execution: He would be “lifted up” on the cross just as Moses had lifted up the snake on a pole (John 3:14-15; see also 8:28; 12:32-33). The metal image of a snake offered an antidote to injected venom; by analogy, those who look at the cross and accept God’s sacrifice lay claim to an eternal promise (John 3:14-16). The Lord sent the serpents to punish Israel because they complained about the manna God had sent them in the wilderness (Num 21:4-9). Jesus referred to himself as the “true bread from heaven,” the manna that provides life for his people (John 6:32-40).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 21:4-9; 2 Kgs 18:1-4; John 3:14-15; 6:32-40; 8:28; 12:30-34<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Bronze Snake Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to mak...","summary_en":"The Bronze Snake Numbers 21:4-9 contains one of many incidents in which the Israelites spoke against God and Moses. When the Israelites complained about their lack of food and water and “this horrible manna” (21:5), the Lord sent poisonous snakes that fatally bit many of the people (cp. Deut 8:15). When the Israelites realized their mistake in speaking against God as well as against Moses, they asked Moses to pray that the Lord would remove the snakes. In response, God instructed Moses to mak...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"33":[{"id":15805,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Heaven","title_en":"Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>Realm (or realms) designated by a Hebrew term used to represent the sky and air and also heaven. The form of the word in Hebrew is dual (implying two of something). Although this dual form may only represent an ancient device for expressing the plural, it is supposed by some to imply the existence of a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and a spiritual heaven.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT writers viewed the physical heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a great arch supported on foundations and pillars (2 Sm 22:8) and spread out above the earth, with rain descending through its doors (Ps 78:23). The keynote of the OT revelation about the physical heavens is set forth in Psalms 8 and 19:1-6. Elsewhere the OT speaks of the atmospheric heavens as the region of the clouds (Ps 147:8), winds (Zec 2:6), rain (Dt 11:11), thunder (1 Sm 2:10), dew (Dt 33:13), frost (Jb 38:29), and the abode of birds (Gn 1:26, 30). It is also the locale of such destructive forces as hail (Jos 10:11), fire, and brimstone (Gn 19:24). In the NT this notion of the vaulted expanse of the sky as the region in which the elements, clouds, and tempests gather (Mt 16:2; Lk 4:25) and birds fly (Lk 9:58) is continued.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the atmospheric regions, the Hebrew idea of the physical heavens includes stellar space, which ultimately embraces the universe. The heavenly bodies of the stellar heavens were viewed by the Hebrews as inexpressibly glorious manifestations of God’s handiwork without having any power or vitality of their own. These include the sun, moon, planets, and stars, which were but lights in the firmament of the heavens (Gn 1:14; 15:5). As such, they were regarded as unworthy of worship because God had, by his own will and grace, made humans superior to them. In fact, the Hebrews were expressly forbidden to worship the stellar bodies (Ex 20:4), the gods and goddesses who represented them (Jer 44:17-25), or to participate in astrological speculation (Is 47:13). Hence, this unique theological ordinance differentiated the Hebrews, who viewed the heavenly bodies as made and moved by the will of God, from the superstitious heathen, who worshiped them.<\/p>\n<p>The term “heaven of heavens” (Dt 10:14; see also <span>kjv<\/span> 1 Kgs 8:27; Pss 68:33; 148:4) is the literal English rendition of the Hebrew idiom for the superlative “the highest heaven.” Some have thought this the counterpart to Paul’s expression “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2), which parallels the classical Greek conception of three heavens. This notion was subsequently adopted by the Roman Catholic medieval church and in the Latin form of <em>Coelum Aqueum, Coelum Sidereum,<\/em> and <em>Coelum Empyreum.<\/em> The basic concept followed the Greek view, and it coincides with the OT view of the physical and spiritual heavens as indicated earlier. Those who follow this approach tend to regard this third heaven as the place reached by the souls of the blessed as they pass through the two lower regions of the atmosphere and outer space containing the celestial bodies, and enter into the uttermost reaches of the universe.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The Lord Jesus indicated that heaven is the dwelling place of God (Mt 6:9). Jesus, during his earthly ministry, repeatedly claimed that he had come from heaven (Jn 3:13; 6:33-51); and on at least three occasions utterances from heaven confirmed these claims (Mt 3:16-17; 17:5; Jn 12:28). There is where the true tabernacle stands, of which the earthly tabernacle was merely a shadow (cf. Heb 8:1-5). That abode of God was in view when the apostle Paul wrote of “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2). As such, it is often seen as a synonym for God himself (cf. Mt 23:22; Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>After Jesus’ ascension, recorded in Acts 1:6-11, two angels reminded the disciples that Jesus would return again from heaven. This was later confirmed by the apostle Paul (1 Cor 15:1-11; Eph 4:7-16; 1 Tm 3:16) and reiterated in the summary of the teachings of the NT known as the Apostles’ Creed. In all, the relationship of Jesus Christ to the heavenly abode of God is inextricably interwoven in the NT and is inseparable from the gospel message itself. Indeed, it is from the “right hand of God” that Christ forever lives to make intercession for those who have come to him by faith (Heb 7:25; cf. Mk 14:62).<\/p>\n<p>Paul asserts that the believer’s body will be made conformable to the glorious body of Jesus Christ when Christ returns from heaven (Phil 3:20-21). The believers need such a heavenly body to match their heavenly citizenship. The term “citizenship” (<span>kjv<\/span>) or “commonwealth” (<span>rsv<\/span>) implies a colony of individuals who live in a foreign country while observing the laws of their homeland instead of the land in which they reside (cf. Acts 22:28). The implication for believers is quite clear: They are to live according to the moral and ethical principles of God as revealed from heaven regardless of the standards proclaimed by the world. They have been raised together with Christ and have been instructed to “seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God” (Col 3:1). From there Christ has blessed his followers “with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:3). The expression “in the heavenly places” is peculiar to Ephesians (see 1:3, 20; 2:6; 3:10; 6:12), suggesting that the blessings of the spiritual world are not relegated to some remote future time or place but can be perceived by faith here and now. That is why believers are said to have been made partakers already in the heavenly calling (Heb 3:1; 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>In the meanwhile, believers look forward to a new heaven and a new earth with the new Jerusalem. There will be no tears, sorrow, pain, death, and night there because the Son of God will be there (Rv 21:1-4, 27; 22:1-5), and in the resurrected state there will be no marrying or giving in marriage (Lk 20:27-38). At least two OT saints, Enoch (Gn 5:22-24; Heb 11:5) and Elijah (2 Kgs 2:11), were translated directly into the presence of God—into heaven. In addition to Paul’s statement about the third heaven, John was called into heaven (Rv 4:1), a heaven that is intended to be populated (cf. 19:1). All believers will ultimately dwell in heaven in their resurrection bodies, which they will receive when the Lord comes for them from heaven (1 Thes 4:16-17; Rv 19:1-4). The Lord will also give treasures and rewards at that time (Mt 5:12; 1 Cor 9:25; 2 Cor 5:1; 2 Tm 4:8; Jas 1:12; 1 Pt 1:4; 5:4; Rv 2:10; 4:10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> “Abraham’s Bosom”; New Heavens and New Earth; Paradise.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>Realm (or realms) designated by a Hebrew term used to represent the sky and air and also heaven. The form of the word in Hebrew is dual (implying two of something). Although this dual form may only represent an ancient device for expressing the plural, it is supposed by some to imply the existence of a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and a spiritual heaven.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT writers viewed the physical heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a great arch supported on foundations and pillars (2 Sm 22:8) and spread out above the earth, with rain descending through its doors (Ps 78:23). The keynote of the OT revelation about the physical heavens is set forth in Psalms 8 and 19:1-6. Elsewhere the OT speaks of the atmospheric heavens as the region of the clouds (Ps 147:8), winds (Zec 2:6), rain (Dt 11:11), thunder (1 Sm 2:10), dew (Dt 33:13), frost (Jb 38:29), and the abode of birds (Gn 1:26, 30). It is also the locale of such destructive forces as hail (Jos 10:11), fire, and brimstone (Gn 19:24). In the NT this notion of the vaulted expanse of the sky as the region in which the elements, clouds, and tempests gather (Mt 16:2; Lk 4:25) and birds fly (Lk 9:58) is continued.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the atmospheric regions, the Hebrew idea of the physical heavens includes stellar space, which ultimately embraces the universe. The heavenly bodies of the stellar heavens were viewed by the Hebrews as inexpressibly glorious manifestations of God’s handiwork without having any power or vitality of their own. These include the sun, moon, planets, and stars, which were but lights in the firmament of the heavens (Gn 1:14; 15:5). As such, they were regarded as unworthy of worship because God had, by his own will and grace, made humans superior to them. In fact, the Hebrews were expressly forbidden to worship the stellar bodies (Ex 20:4), the gods and goddesses who represented them (Jer 44:17-25), or to participate in astrological speculation (Is 47:13). Hence, this unique theological ordinance differentiated the Hebrews, who viewed the heavenly bodies as made and moved by the will of God, from the superstitious heathen, who worshiped them.<\/p>\n<p>The term “heaven of heavens” (Dt 10:14; see also <span>kjv<\/span> 1 Kgs 8:27; Pss 68:33; 148:4) is the literal English rendition of the Hebrew idiom for the superlative “the highest heaven.” Some have thought this the counterpart to Paul’s expression “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2), which parallels the classical Greek conception of three heavens. This notion was subsequently adopted by the Roman Catholic medieval church and in the Latin form of <em>Coelum Aqueum, Coelum Sidereum,<\/em> and <em>Coelum Empyreum.<\/em> The basic concept followed the Greek view, and it coincides with the OT view of the physical and spiritual heavens as indicated earlier. Those who follow this approach tend to regard this third heaven as the place reached by the souls of the blessed as they pass through the two lower regions of the atmosphere and outer space containing the celestial bodies, and enter into the uttermost reaches of the universe.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The Lord Jesus indicated that heaven is the dwelling place of God (Mt 6:9). Jesus, during his earthly ministry, repeatedly claimed that he had come from heaven (Jn 3:13; 6:33-51); and on at least three occasions utterances from heaven confirmed these claims (Mt 3:16-17; 17:5; Jn 12:28). There is where the true tabernacle stands, of which the earthly tabernacle was merely a shadow (cf. Heb 8:1-5). That abode of God was in view when the apostle Paul wrote of “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2). As such, it is often seen as a synonym for God himself (cf. Mt 23:22; Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>After Jesus’ ascension, recorded in Acts 1:6-11, two angels reminded the disciples that Jesus would return again from heaven. This was later confirmed by the apostle Paul (1 Cor 15:1-11; Eph 4:7-16; 1 Tm 3:16) and reiterated in the summary of the teachings of the NT known as the Apostles’ Creed. In all, the relationship of Jesus Christ to the heavenly abode of God is inextricably interwoven in the NT and is inseparable from the gospel message itself. Indeed, it is from the “right hand of God” that Christ forever lives to make intercession for those who have come to him by faith (Heb 7:25; cf. Mk 14:62).<\/p>\n<p>Paul asserts that the believer’s body will be made conformable to the glorious body of Jesus Christ when Christ returns from heaven (Phil 3:20-21). The believers need such a heavenly body to match their heavenly citizenship. The term “citizenship” (<span>kjv<\/span>) or “commonwealth” (<span>rsv<\/span>) implies a colony of individuals who live in a foreign country while observing the laws of their homeland instead of the land in which they reside (cf. Acts 22:28). The implication for believers is quite clear: They are to live according to the moral and ethical principles of God as revealed from heaven regardless of the standards proclaimed by the world. They have been raised together with Christ and have been instructed to “seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God” (Col 3:1). From there Christ has blessed his followers “with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:3). The expression “in the heavenly places” is peculiar to Ephesians (see 1:3, 20; 2:6; 3:10; 6:12), suggesting that the blessings of the spiritual world are not relegated to some remote future time or place but can be perceived by faith here and now. That is why believers are said to have been made partakers already in the heavenly calling (Heb 3:1; 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>In the meanwhile, believers look forward to a new heaven and a new earth with the new Jerusalem. There will be no tears, sorrow, pain, death, and night there because the Son of God will be there (Rv 21:1-4, 27; 22:1-5), and in the resurrected state there will be no marrying or giving in marriage (Lk 20:27-38). At least two OT saints, Enoch (Gn 5:22-24; Heb 11:5) and Elijah (2 Kgs 2:11), were translated directly into the presence of God—into heaven. In addition to Paul’s statement about the third heaven, John was called into heaven (Rv 4:1), a heaven that is intended to be populated (cf. 19:1). All believers will ultimately dwell in heaven in their resurrection bodies, which they will receive when the Lord comes for them from heaven (1 Thes 4:16-17; Rv 19:1-4). The Lord will also give treasures and rewards at that time (Mt 5:12; 1 Cor 9:25; 2 Cor 5:1; 2 Tm 4:8; Jas 1:12; 1 Pt 1:4; 5:4; Rv 2:10; 4:10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> “Abraham’s Bosom”; New Heavens and New Earth; Paradise.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HEAVEN Realm (or realms) designated by a Hebrew term used to represent the sky and air and also heaven. The form of the word in Hebrew is dual (implying two of something). Although this dual form may only represent an ancient device for expressing the plural, it is supposed by some to imply the existence of a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and a spiritual heaven. In the Old Testament The OT writers viewed the physical heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a great arch supported on found...","summary_en":"HEAVEN Realm (or realms) designated by a Hebrew term used to represent the sky and air and also heaven. The form of the word in Hebrew is dual (implying two of something). Although this dual form may only represent an ancient device for expressing the plural, it is supposed by some to imply the existence of a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and a spiritual heaven. In the Old Testament The OT writers viewed the physical heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a great arch supported on found...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66046,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93672,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121298,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148924,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"34":[{"id":56443,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:34","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:34","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:34<\/strong> <em>Sir, . . . give us that bread:<\/em> This request parallels the request of the Samaritan woman (4:15). Spiritual awakening begins with a request for God’s gift.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:34<\/strong> <em>Sir, . . . give us that bread:<\/em> This request parallels the request of the Samaritan woman (4:15). Spiritual awakening begins with a request for God’s gift.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:34 Sir, . . . give us that bread: This request parallels the request of the Samaritan woman (4:15). Spiritual awakening begins with a request for God’s gift.","summary_en":"6:34 Sir, . . . give us that bread: This request parallels the request of the Samaritan woman (4:15). Spiritual awakening begins with a request for God’s gift.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84069,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:34","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:34","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:34<\/strong> <em>Sir, . . . give us that bread:<\/em> This request parallels the request of the Samaritan woman (4:15). Spiritual awakening begins with a request for God’s gift.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:34<\/strong> <em>Sir, . . . give us that bread:<\/em> This request parallels the request of the Samaritan woman (4:15). Spiritual awakening begins with a request for God’s gift.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:34 Sir, . . . give us that bread: This request parallels the request of the Samaritan woman (4:15). Spiritual awakening begins with a request for God’s gift.","summary_en":"6:34 Sir, . . . give us that bread: This request parallels the request of the Samaritan woman (4:15). Spiritual awakening begins with a request for God’s gift.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111695,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:34","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:34","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:34<\/strong> <em>Sir, . . . give us that bread:<\/em> This request parallels the request of the Samaritan woman (4:15). Spiritual awakening begins with a request for God’s gift.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:34<\/strong> <em>Sir, . . . give us that bread:<\/em> This request parallels the request of the Samaritan woman (4:15). Spiritual awakening begins with a request for God’s gift.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:34 Sir, . . . give us that bread: This request parallels the request of the Samaritan woman (4:15). Spiritual awakening begins with a request for God’s gift.","summary_en":"6:34 Sir, . . . give us that bread: This request parallels the request of the Samaritan woman (4:15). Spiritual awakening begins with a request for God’s gift.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139321,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:34","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:34","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:34<\/strong> <em>Sir, . . . give us that bread:<\/em> This request parallels the request of the Samaritan woman (4:15). Spiritual awakening begins with a request for God’s gift.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:34<\/strong> <em>Sir, . . . give us that bread:<\/em> This request parallels the request of the Samaritan woman (4:15). Spiritual awakening begins with a request for God’s gift.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:34 Sir, . . . give us that bread: This request parallels the request of the Samaritan woman (4:15). Spiritual awakening begins with a request for God’s gift.","summary_en":"6:34 Sir, . . . give us that bread: This request parallels the request of the Samaritan woman (4:15). Spiritual awakening begins with a request for God’s gift.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"35":[{"id":4752,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"and Text of the (New Testament) Bible*, Manuscripts","title_en":"and Text of the (New Testament) Bible*, Manuscripts","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, M<span>anuscripts and Text of the (New Testament)<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all copies of any work of literature were made by hand (hence, the name “manuscript”). According to a current tabulation, there are 99 papyrus manuscripts, 257 uncial manuscripts, and 2,795 minuscule manuscripts. We can add 2,209 Greek lectionaries to this list. Therefore, we have over 5,350 manuscript copies of the Greek NT or portions thereof. No other work of Greek literature can boast of such numbers.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantPapyrusManuscripts\">Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>Papyrus is a tall, aquatic reed, the pith of which is cut into strips, laid in a crosswork pattern and glued together to make a page for writing. The papyrus rolls of Egypt have been used as a writing surface since the early third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. The Greeks adopted papyrus around 900 <span>BC<\/span>, and later the Romans adopted its use. However, the oldest extant Greek rolls of papyrus date from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>. Unfortunately, papyrus is perishable, requiring a dry climate for its preservation. That is why so many papyri have been discovered in the desert sands of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The NT papyrus manuscripts (abbreviated as “P”) are generally the earliest manuscripts of the NT. Broadly speaking, the most important ones can be categorized in three groups: the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (from Oxyrhynchus, Egypt), (2) the Beatty Papyri (named after the owner); and (3) the Bodmer Papyri (named after the owner).<\/p>\n<h5>The Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>Beginning in 1898 B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt discovered thousands of papyrus fragments in the ancient rubbish heaps of Oxyrhynchus, Egypt. This site yielded volumes of papyrus fragments containing all sorts of written material (literature, business and legal contracts, letters, etc.) as well as over 40 manuscripts containing portions of the NT. Some of the more noteworthy papyrus manuscripts from Oxyrhynchus are as follows:<\/p>\n<h6>P1 (P. Oxy. 2)<\/h6>\n<p>This late second-century manuscript contains Matthew 1:1-9, 12, 14-20. Grenfell and Hunt in the winter of 1896–97 went to Oxyrhynchus (now called El Bahnasa) in search of ancient Christian documents. P1 was discovered on the second day of the dig. At the time of this discovery, this was the earliest extant copy of any NT portion—at least 100 years earlier than Codex Vaticanus. The copyist of P1 seems to have faithfully followed a very reliable exemplar. Where there are major variants, P1 agrees with the best Alexandrian witnesses, especially B (Codex Vaticanus), from which it rarely varies.<\/p>\n<h6>P5 (P. Oxy. 208 and 1781)<\/h6>\n<p>Two separate portions of this third-century manuscript were unearthed from Oxyrhynchus by Grenfell and Hunt, both from the same papyrus manuscript. The first portion contains John 1:23-31, 33-40 on one fragment and John 20:11-17 on another—probably on the first and last quires of a manuscript containing only the Gospel of John. This portion was published in volume II of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/em> in 1899; the second portion—containing John 16:14-30—was not published until 1922 in volume XV of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>After examining the first portion, Grenfell and Hunt said, “The text is a good one, and appears to have affinities with that of Codex Sinaiticus, with which the papyrus agrees in several readings not found elsewhere.” The papyrus, written in a documentary hand, is marked for its brevity.<\/p>\n<h6>P13 (P. Oxy. 657 and PSI 1292)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated between 175 and 225, contains 12 columns from a roll preserving the text of Hebrews 2:14–5:5; 10:8-22; 10:29–11:13; 11:28–12:7. The text of Hebrews was written in a reformed documentary hand on the back of the papyrus containing the new epitome of Livy. For this reason, some scholars think the manuscript was possibly brought to Egpyt by a Roman official and left behind when he left his post. P13 very often agrees with B, and it supplements B where it is lacking—namely, from Hebrews 9:14 to the end of Hebrews. P13 and P46 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P77 (P. Oxy. 2683 + 4405)<\/h6>\n<p>Dated c. 150–75, this is the earliest manuscript of Matthew (23:30-39). The manuscript is clearly a literary production. It was written in an elegant hand and has what was or became a standard system of chapter division, as well as punctuation and breathing marks. P77 has close textual affinities with Codex Sinaiticus.<\/p>\n<h6>P90 (P. Oxy. 3523)<\/h6>\n<p>This second-century manuscript (c. 150–75) contains John 18:36–19:7. The handwriting (an upright, rounded, elegant script) is much like that found in P66. Furthermore, P90 has more affinity with P66 than with any other single manuscript, though it does not concur with P66 in its entirety.<\/p>\n\n<h6>P. Oxy. 4404<\/h6>\n<p>Containing Matthew 21:34-37, 43, 45, this manuscript could be the earliest extant manuscript of the NT in that the script is early Roman and therefore could be dated to the early second century.<\/p>\n<h5>The Chester Beatty Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased from a dealer in Egypt during the 1930s by Chester Beatty and by the University of Michigan. The three manuscripts in this collection are very early and contain a large portion of the NT text. P45 (c. 200) contains portions of all four Gospels and Acts; P46 (c. 125) has almost all of Paul’s epistles and Hebrews; and P47 (third century) contains Revelation 9–17.<\/p>\n<h6>P45 (Chester Beatty Papyrus I)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has the four Gospels and Acts (Mt 20:24-32; 21:13-19; 25:41–26:39; Mk 4:36–9:31; 11:27–12:28; Lk 6:31–7:7; 9:26–14:33; Jn 4:51–5:2, 21-25; 10:7-25; 10:30–11:10, 18-36, 42-57; Acts 4:27–17:17). The order of books in the original intact manuscript was probably as follows: Matthew, John, Luke, Mark, Acts (the so-called Western order). This manuscript was dated by Kenyon to the early third century, a date that was confirmed by the papyrologists W. Schubart and H. I. Bell. This continues to be the date assigned to this manuscript in modern handbooks on textual criticism and critical editions of the Greek NT, but the consistent formation of certain letters suggests an earlier date—maybe sometime in the late second century.<\/p>\n<p>The scribe of P45 worked without any intention of exactly reproducing his source. He wrote with a great amount of freedom—harmonizing, smoothing out, substituting at will. In short, the scribe did not actually copy words. He saw through the language to its idea-content, and copied that in words of his own choosing, or in rearranged order. Thus, in the scribe of P45 we see an exegete and a paraphraser.<\/p>\n<h6>P46 (Chester Beatty Papyrus II)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has most of Paul’s epistles (excluding the Pastorals) in this order: Romans 5:17–6:14; 8:15–15:9; 15:11–16:27; Hebrews 1:1–13:25; 1 Corinthians 1:1–16:22; 2 Corinthians 1:1–13:13; Ephesians 1:1–6:24; Galatians 1:1–6:18; Philippians 1:1–4:23; Colossians 1:1–4:18; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 1:9–2:3; 5:5-9, 23-28 (with minor lacunae in each of the books).<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript was originally dated to the early third century. But others, since, have dated the manuscript earlier in the second century. The scribe who produced this manuscript used an early, excellent exemplar. He was a professional scribe because there are stichoi notations at the end of several books (see the conclusion of Romans, 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians). The stichoi were used by professionals to note how many lines had been copied for commensurate pay. Most likely, the ex officio of the scriptorium (perhaps connected with a church library) paginated the codex and indicated the stichoi. The scribe himself made a few corrections as he went, and then several other readers made corrections here and there.<\/p>\n<p>The text of P46 shows a strong affinity with B (especially in Ephesians, Colossians, and Hebrews) and next with א (Codex Sinaiticus). P46 agrees much less with the later representatives of the Alexandrian text. In short, P46 is proto-Alexandrian. In Hebrews, P46 and P13 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P47 (Chester Beatty Papyrus III)<\/h6>\n<p>This third-century codex contains Revelation 9:10–17:2. The text of P47 agrees more often with that of Codex Sinaiticus than with any other manuscript (including Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus), though it often shows independence.<\/p>\n<h5>The Bodmer Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased by M. Martin Bodmer from a dealer in Egypt during the 1950s and 1960s. The three important papyri in this collection are P66 (c. 175, containing almost all of John), P72 (third century, having all of 1 and 2 Peter and Jude), and P75 (c. 200, containing large parts of Luke 3—John 15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h4\" id=\"P66\">P66 (Papyrus Bodmer II)<\/p>\n<p>This manuscript contains most of John’s Gospel (1:1–6:11; 6:35–14:26, 29-30; 15:2-26; 16:2-4, 6-7; 16:10–20:20, 22-23; 20:25–21:9). The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11), making it the earliest witness to not include this spurious passage. The manuscript is usually dated as c. 200, but the renowned paleographer Herbert Hunger has argued that P66 should be dated to the first half, if not the first quarter, of the second century.<\/p>\n<p>According to recent studies, it seems evident that P66 has preserved the work of three individuals: the original scribe, a thoroughgoing corrector, and a minor corrector. With a practiced calligraphic hand, the original scribe of P66 wrote in larger print as he went along in order to fill out the codex. The large print throughout indicates that it was written to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The text exhibits the scribe’s knowledge of other portions of Scripture (inasmuch as he harmonized John 6:69 to Matthew 16:16 and John 21:6 to Luke 5:5), his use of standard <em>nomina sacra<\/em> (a way of writing divine names), and his special use of <em>nomina sacra<\/em> for the words “cross” and “crucify.”<\/p>\n<p>The original scribe was quite free in his interaction with the text; he produced several singular readings that reveal his independent interpretation of the text. While the numerous scribal mistakes would seem to indicate that the scribe was inattentive, many of the singular readings—prior to correction—reveal that he was not detached from the narrative of the text. Rather, he became so absorbed in his reading that he often forgot the exact words he was copying. His task as a copyist was to duplicate the exemplar word for word, but this was frustrated by the fact that he was reading the text in logical semantic chunks and often became a coproducer of a new text. As a result, he continually had to stop his reading and make many in-process corrections. But he left several places uncorrected, which were later fixed by the <em>diorthotes<\/em> (official corrector). The finished product is quite good, presenting a text that is very close to the Alexandrian witnesses.<\/p>\n<h6>P72 (Papyrus Bodmer VII–VIII)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated late third century, has an interesting collection of writings in one codex: 1 Peter 1:1–5:14; 2 Peter 1:1–3:18; Jude 1:1-25; the Nativity of Mary, the apocryphal correspondence of Paul to the Corinthians, the eleventh ode of Solomon, Melito’s Homily on the Passover, a fragment of a hymn, the Apology of Phileas, and Psalms 33 and 34.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars think that four scribes took part in producing the entire manuscript. First Peter has clear Alexandrian affinities—especially with B. Second Peter and (especially) Jude display more of an uncontrolled type text (usually associated with the “Western” text), with several independent readings.<\/p>\n<h6>P75 (Papyrus Bodmer XIV–XV)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex contains most of Luke and John (Lk 3:18–4:2; 4:34–5:10; 5:37–18:18; 22:4–24:53; Jn 1:1–11:45, 48-57; 12:3–13:1, 8-9; 14:8-30; 15:7-8.) The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11). The manuscript can be dated to the late second or early third century.<\/p>\n<p>The copyist of P75 was a literate scribe trained in making books. His craftsmanship shows through in his tight calligraphy and controlled copying. The handwriting displayed in this manuscript is typically called by paleographers the common angular type of the late second to early third century. The scribe’s Christianity shows in his abbreviations of the <em>nomina sacra<\/em><em>,<\/em> as well as in his abbreviation of the word “cross.” These are telltale signs of a scribe who belonged to the Christian community. Furthermore, the large typeface indicates that the manuscript was composed to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The scribe even added a system of sectional divisions to aid any would-be lector. Thus, we have a manuscript written by a Christian for other Christians.<\/p>\n<p>There are several indications of the scribe’s Alexandrian orientation. First and foremost is his scriptoral acumen. He is the best of all the early Christian scribes, and his manuscript is an extremely accurate copy. P75 is the work of an extremely disciplined scribe who copied with the intention of being careful and accurate. Scholars generally agree that P75 displays the kind of text that was used in making Codex Vaticanus (there is 87 percent agreement between P75 and B). As such, textual scholars have a high regard for P75’s textual fidelity.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Other Papyrus Manuscripts<\/h5>\n<h6>P4 + P64 + P67<\/h6>\n<p>These three papyrus manuscripts are part of one codex dated <span>AD<\/span> 150–175. The manuscript was the work of a professional scribe, and the text is extremely accurate.<\/p>\n<h6>P32 (Rylands Papyrus 5)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, preserving Titus 1:11-15; 2:3-8, is dated c. 175, making it the earliest extant copy of any of the Pastoral Epistles. P32 shows agreement with א and with F and G. Since F and G (nearly identical manuscripts) go back to the same archetype, it is possible that P32 could be linked to the same source.<\/p>\n<h6>P52 (Rylands Papyrus 457)<\/h6>\n<p>This fragment, containing John 18:31-34, 37-38, is noteworthy because of its date: c. 110–125. Many scholars (F. Kenyon, H. I. Bell, A. Deissmann, and W. H. P. Hatch) have confirmed this dating. The manuscript came from the Fayum or Oxyrhynchus site. It was acquired in 1920 by Grenfell, but it remained unnoticed among hundreds of papyri until 1934, when C. H. Roberts recognized that this fragment preserves a few verses from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantUncialManuscripts\">Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>The manuscripts typically classified as “uncial” are so designated to differentiate them from papyrus manuscripts. In a sense, this is a misnomer because the real difference has to do with the material they are written on—vellum (treated animal hide) as compared to papyrus—not the kind of letters used. Indeed, the papyri are also written in uncials (capital letters), but the term “uncial” typically describes the majuscule lettering that was prominent in fourth-century biblical texts, such as in א, A, B, C.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Sinaiticus (or א)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex contains the entire OT and the NT in this order: the four Gospels, the Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews), Acts, the General Epistles, Revelation. It also includes the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. The codex cannot be earlier than 340 (the year Eusebius died) because the Eusebian sections of the text are indicated in the margins of the Gospels by a contemporary hand. Most scholars date it 350–375.<\/p>\n<p>This codex was discovered by Constantin von Tischendorf in St Catherine’s Monastery (situated at the foot of Mt Sinai). On a visit to the monastery in 1844 he noticed in a wastebasket some parchment leaves that were being used to light the lamps. He was allowed to take this waste paper, which proved to be 43 leaves from various parts of the Greek translation of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>In 1853 he made a second trip to the monastery and found nothing. In 1859, however, on his third trip, he found not only other parts of the OT but also the complete NT. He was finally able to persuade the monastery authorities to present the manuscript to the czar, the great patron of the Greek Catholic Church, who placed it in the Imperial Library in St Petersburg. The czar gave great honors to the monastery and its authorities, and everybody seemed well pleased. Later Tischendorf was charged with having stolen the manuscript from its lawful owners, but the better textual scholars do not accept that story.<\/p>\n\n<p>The manuscript remained in the Imperial Library until 1933, when it was purchased by the British Museum for the huge sum of £100,000 (about $500,000). Textual criticism made the headlines because one manuscript was bought for this much money, raised largely by public subscription during the Great Depression. The manuscript is now on display in the manuscript room of the museum, where it is considered one of its most prized possessions.<\/p>\n<p>The text of Sinaiticus is very closely related to that of Codex Vaticanus. They agree in presenting the purest type of text, usually called the Alexandrian text type. Tischendorf greatly used the textual evidence of Codex Sinaiticus in preparing his critical editions of the Greek NT. Tischendorf thought four scribes had originally produced the codex, whom he named scribes A, B, C, D. After reinvestigation, H. J. Milne and T. C. Skeat identified only three scribes: A (who wrote the historical and poetical books of the OT, as well as most of the NT), B (who wrote the Prophets and the Shepherd of Hermas), and D (who wrote some Psalms, Tobit, Judith, and 4 Maccabees, and redid small sections of the NT). Milne and Skeat demonstrated that scribe A of Codex Vaticanus was likely the same scribe as scribe D of Codex Sinaiticus. If this true, then א is contemporary with B—perhaps produced in the same scriptorium in Alexandria. Codex Sinaiticus provides a fairly reliable witness to the NT; however, the scribe was not as careful as the scribe of B.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Alexandrinus (A)<\/h5>\n<p>This is one of the three most important codices containing early copies of the whole Bible in Greek (the other two being the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus codexes). The name Alexandrinus comes from ancient records suggesting that it was copied in Egypt during the early part of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. The early history of this manuscript and its Egyptian provenance is partially revealed by its flyleaves. A note by Cyril of Lucar (patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople in the 1620s) states that, according to tradition, it was written by Thecla, a noble lady of Egypt shortly after the Council of Nicaea (325) and that her name was originally inscribed at the end of the volume but the last page was lost due to mutilation. An Arabic note of the 13th or 14th century also says that the manuscript was written by “Thecla the martyr.” Another Arabic note says that is was presented to the patriarchal cell of Alexandria (c. 1098). Cyril of Lucar took the manuscript from Alexandria to Constantinople in 1621 and then gave it to Charles I of England in 1627, where it became part of the Royal Library, then later the British Museum.<\/p>\n<p>Only 773 of the original 820 or so pages still exist. The rest were lost as the book was passed down through the centuries. The surviving parts of Alexandrinus contain a Greek translation of the whole OT, the Apocrypha (including four books of Maccabees and Psalm 151), most of the NT, and some early Christian writings (of which the First and Second Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians are the most important).<\/p>\n<p>Frederick Kenyon thought the codex was the work of five scribes, to each of whom he designated a Roman numeral. According to Kenyon, scribes I and II copied the OT; scribe III did Matthew, Mark, 1 Corinthians 10:8—Philemon 1:25; scribe IV did Luke—Acts, General Epistles, Romans 1:1—1 Corinthians 10:8; and scribe V did Revelation. Milne and Skeat, however, argued that the whole codex was the work of two copyists (I and II). W. H. P. Hatch noted that many corrections have been made in the manuscript, most of them at an early date. Some of these corrections were introduced by the scribe himself, and others came from later hands.<\/p>\n<p>Evidently, the scribes of this codex used exemplars of varying quality for various sections of the NT. The exemplar used for the Gospels was of poor quality, reflecting a Byzantine text type. Its testimony in the Epistles is much better, and in Revelation it provides the best witness to the original text.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Codex Vaticanus (B)<\/h5>\n<p>Codex Vaticanus is the Vatican Manuscript, so named because it is the most famous manuscript in the Vatican Library in Rome. This manuscript has been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1475, but it was not made available to scholars, such as Constantin von Tischendorf and Samuel Tregelles, until the middle of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>At one time, the codex contained the whole Greek Bible, including most of the books of the Apocrypha, but it has lost many of its leaves. Originally it must have had about 820 leaves (1,640 pp), but now it has 759—617 in the OT and 142 in the NT. The major gaps of the manuscript are Genesis 1:1–46:28; 2 Samuel 2:5-7, 10-13; Psalms 106:27–138:6; Hebrews 9:14–13:25; the Pastoral Epistles; and Revelation. Each leaf measures ten and a half by ten inches (26.7 by 25.4 centimeters). Each page has three columns (two for the poetical books) with 40 to 44 lines to the column. The manuscript was written by two different scribes. It is dated in the early to middle part of the fourth century. It is not known where the manuscript originated, but it has been in the Vatican Library from the time of its earliest catalog in 1475.<\/p>\n\n<p>When Napoleon conquered Rome, he brought its treasures to Paris, including this manuscript. The scholar Hug identified it and called the attention of other scholars to it. After the downfall of Napoleon, the manuscript was returned to the Vatican Library. Competent textual scholars were not allowed to do careful work on it until a photographic edition was published in 1890. It is now on exhibit in the Vatican Library.<\/p>\n<p>The text of the Vatican Manuscript is much like that of Codex Sinaiticus. These are generally recognized as the two finest examples of the Alexandrian type of Greek text of the NT. The Greek text of the OT is very fine too, but it is not quite so important, as the original language of the OT was Hebrew. Virtually all the textual scholars since the days of Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort (who brought out their Greek Testament, including their theory of textual criticism, in 1881), recognize this neutral type of text as a very early text and a very pure text, an extremely accurate reproduction of what the original text must have been. Westcott and Hort called it a second-century text accurate in 999 out of 1,000 words so far as any matter of translatable difference was concerned. א and B are the finest examples of this type of text, but it is also found in a few other Greek uncial manuscripts, a few of the early translations, and in the writings of a few of the early church fathers. Since the days of Westcott and Hort, their theory has been confirmed by the discovery of some papyrus manuscripts, notably the Bodmer Papyri, discovered in the 1950s.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex is a palimpsest (the original writing was erased and different words written on the same material). It originally contained the entire Bible but now has only parts of six OT books and portions of all NT books except 2 Thessalonians and 2 John. The single-column Bible text, written in the 5th century <span>AD<\/span>, was erased in the 12th century and replaced by a two-column text of a Greek translation of sermons or treatises by a certain Ephraem, a 4th-century Syrian church leader. Such a practice was common in periods of economic depression or when parchment was scarce. The original writing was scraped from the writing surface and the surface smoothed. Then new compositions could be written on the prepared surface. Using chemicals Tischendorf was able to read much of the erased document.<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript may have been brought from the east to Florence by a learned Greek named Andrew John Lascar in the time of Lorenzo de’Medici. Since Lascar was known as Rhyndacenus (from the river Rhyndacus), he probably came from the region of Phrygia (site of ancient Laodicea). Where the manuscript was prior to this is not known. The Ephraemi manuscript was brought to Italy in the early sixth century, where it became the property of the Medici family. Catherine de’Medici took it to France, where it remains today.<\/p>\n<p>The text of this manuscript is mixed—it is compounded from all the major text types, agreeing frequently with the later koine of Byzantine type, which most scholars regard as the least valuable type of NT text.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Bezae (D)<\/h5>\n<p>This is a Greek-Latin diglot containing Matthew—Acts, 3 John, with lacunae. Most scholars date it late fourth or early fifth century (c. 400). Some scholars think the codex was produced in either Egypt or North Africa by a scribe whose mother tongue was Latin. Another scholar (D. C. Parker) has argued that it was copied in Beirut, a center of Latin legal studies during the fifth century, where both Latin and Greek were used. Evidently, it was produced by a scribe who knew Latin better than Greek, and then was corrected by several scribes. In any event, the codex somehow came into the hands of Theodore Beza, French scholar and successor to Calvin. Beza gave it to the Cambridge University Library in 1581.<\/p>\n<p>This codex is probably the most controversial of the NT uncials because of its marked independence. Its many additions, omissions, and alterations (especially in Luke and Acts) are the work of a significant theologian. A few earlier manuscripts (P29, P38, P48, and 0171) appear to be precursors to the type of text found in D, which is considered the principal witness of the Western text-type. Thus, Codex Bezae could be a copy of an earlier revised edition. This reviser must have been a scholar who had a propensity for adding historical, biographical, and geographical details. More than anything, he was intent on filling in gaps in the narrative by adding circumstantial details.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Washingtonianus, or The Freer Gospels (W)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex, dated around 400, has the four Gospels and Acts. It is often referred to as the Freer Gospels—named after its owner, Charles Freer. The codex likely came from the ruins of a monastery near Giza. The handwriting is quite similar to that found in a fifth-century fragment of the book of Enoch found at Akhmim in 1886.<\/p>\n<p>Codex W was copied from a parent manuscript (exemplar) that had been pieced together from several different manuscripts. This is obvious because the textual presentation of W is noticeably variegated and even the stratification of the text is matched by similar variations in paragraphing. The scribe who collated the parent manuscript drew upon various sources to put together his Gospel codex. It is likely that the scribe of the parent manuscript used a text that came from North Africa (the “Western” text) for the first part of Mark, and the scribe of W used manuscripts from Antioch for Matthew and the second part of Luke to fill the gaps in the more ancient manuscript he was copying. Detailed textual analysis reveals the variegated textual stratifications of W, as follows: in Matthew the text is Byzantine; in Mark the text is first Western (1:1–5:30), then Caesarean in Mark 5:31–16:20 (akin to P45); in Luke the text is first Alexandrian (1:1–8:12), then Byzantine. John is more complicated because the first part of John (1:1–5:11), which fills a quire, was the work of a seventh-century scribe who must have replaced a damaged quire. (W<span>s<\/span> designates the work of this scribe.) This first section has a mixture of Alexandrian and Western readings, as does the rest of John.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex 1739<\/h5>\n<p>This tenth-century codex has Acts and the Epistles. The manuscript was discovered at Mt Athos in 1879 by E. von der Goltz. The manuscript has strong textual affinities with P46, B, 1739, Coptic Sahidic, Coptic Boharic, Clement, and Origen. The relationship between P46, B, and 1739 is remarkable because 1739 is a tenth-century manuscript that was copied from a fourth-century manuscript of excellent quality. According to a colophon, the scribe of 1739 for the Pauline Epistles followed a manuscript that came from Caesarea in the library of Pamphilus and that contained an Origenian text. The three manuscripts, P46, B, and 1739, form a clear textual line: from P46 (early second century) to B (early fourth century) to 1739 (tenth century based on fourth century).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTextoftheNewTestament\">The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The original text of the NT is the “published” text—that is, the text as it was in its final edited form and released for circulation in the Christian community. For some books of the NT, there is little difference between the original composition and the published text. After the author wrote or dictated his work, he (or an associate) made the final editorial corrections and then released it for distribution. As is the case for books published in modern times, so in ancient times, the original writing of the author is not always the same as what is published—due to the editorial process. Nonetheless, the author is credited with the final edited text, and the published book is attributed to the author and considered the autograph. This autograph is the original published text. Of course, in this case the autographs do not exist, so scholars have to rely on copies to recover or reconstruct the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars think it is impossible to recover the original text of the Greek NT because they have not been able to reconstruct the early history of textual transmission. Other modern scholars are less pessimistic but still quite guarded in affirming the possiblity. And yet others are optimistic because we possess many early manuscripts of excellent quality and because our view of the early period of textual transmission has been getting clearer and clearer.<\/p>\n<p>When we speak of recovering the text of the NT, we are referring to individual books of the NT, not to the entire volume per se, because each book (or group of books—such as the Pauline Epistles) had its own unique history of textual transmission. The earliest extant copy of an entire NT text is the one preserved in Codex Sinaiticus (written about <span>AD<\/span> 375). (Codex Vaticanus lacks the Pastoral Epistles and Revelation.) Prior to the fourth century, the NT was circulated in its various parts: as a single book or a group of books (such as the four Gospels or the Pauline Epistles). Manuscripts from the late first century to the third century have been found with individual books such as Matthew (P1, P77), Mark (P88), Luke (P69), John (P5, 22, 52, 66), Acts (P91), Revelation (P18, 47), or containing groups of books, such as the four Gospels with Acts (P45), the Pauline Epistles (P30, P46, P92), the Petrine Epistles and Jude (P72). Each of the books of the NT has had its own textual history and has been preserved with varying degrees of accuracy. Nonetheless, all of the books were altered from the original state due to the process of manual copying decade after decade and century after century. And the text of each of the books needs to be recovered.<\/p>\n<p>The NT text was affected with many variations in its early history. In the late first and early second century, the oral traditions and the written word existed side by side with equal status—especially with respect to the material of the Gospels. Often, the text was changed by scribes attempting to conform the written message to the oral tradition or attempting to conform one Gospel account to another. By the end of the second century and into the third century, many of the significant variant readings entered into the textual stream.<\/p>\n<p>The early period of textual transmission, however, was not completely marred by textual infidelity and scribal liberty. There were those scribes who copied the text faithfully and reverently—that is, they recognized that they were copying a sacred text written by an apostle. The formalization of canonization did not ascribe this sacredness to the text. Canonization came about as the result of common, historical recognition of the sacredness of various NT books. Certain NT books, such as the four Gospels, Acts, and Paul’s epistles were considered inspired literature from the onset. As such, certain scribes copied them with reverential fidelity.<\/p>\n<p>Other scribes, however, felt free to make “improvements” in the text—either in the interest of doctrine and harmonization or due to the influence of a competitive oral tradition. The manuscripts produced in such a manner created a kind of “popular text”—i.e., an uncontrolled text. (This text type used to be called the “Western text,” but scholars now recognize this as a misnomer.)<\/p>\n<p>During the second century, there were a few men who produced recensions of the NT text. According to Eusebius, Theodotus (and his followers) altered the text for their own purposes. In the middle of the second century, Marcion expunged his copies of the Gospel according to Luke of all references to the Jewish background of Jesus, and Tatian’s harmony of the Gospels contains several textual alterations that gave support to ascetic views. And yet another recendor created the D-type text for the Gospels and Acts. This theologically minded redactor, living in the late second or third century, created a text that had short-lived popularity. Three third-century papyri, P29, P38, P48, each containing a portion from the book of Acts, may be precursors to the D-type text in Acts. But there are other papyri containing portions of Acts that provide even earlier testimony to a purer form of Acts—namely, P45 (c. 150) and P91 (c. 200), thereby showing that the D-type text of Acts did not necessarily antedate the purer form.<\/p>\n<p>Besides these endeavors—which are all noted for creating textual impurities—there was no recension of the NT text in the second century. Rather, it was a period in which there were scribes who exercised freedom in copying and those who demonstrated acumen. The manuscripts produced by the latter are those that come closest to preserving the original text. A prime example of an accurate late-second-century manuscript is P75.<\/p>\n<p>It is a well-known fact that the text produced by the scribe of P75 is a very accurate manuscript. It is also well-known that P75 was the kind of manuscript used in formulating Codex Vaticanus—the readings of P75 and B are remarkably similar. Prior to the discovery of P75, certain scholars thought Codex Vaticanus was the work of a fourth-century recension; others (chiefly Hort) thought it must trace back to a very early and accurate copy. Hort said that Codex Vaticanus preserves “not only a very ancient text, but a very pure line of a very ancient text” (Westcott and Hort, <em>The<\/em> <em>Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> pp 250–51). P75 appears to have shown that Hort was right.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the discovery of P75, many textual scholars were convinced that the second- and third-century papyri displayed a text in flux, a text characterized only by individual independence. The Chester Beatty Papyrus, P45, and the Bodmer Papyri, P66 and P72 (in 2 Peter and Jude), show this kind of independence. Scholars thought that scribes at Alexandria must have used several such texts to produce a good recension—as is exhibited in Codex Vaticanus. But we now know that Codex Vaticanus was not the result of a scholarly recension, resulting from editorial selection across the various textual histories. Rather, it is now quite clear that Codex Vaticanus was simply a copy (with some modifications) of a manuscript much like P75, not a fourth-century recension.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars may point out that this does not automatically mean that P75 and B represent the original text. What it does mean, they say, is that we have a second-century manuscript showing great affinity with a fourth-century manuscript whose quality has been highly esteemed. But various scholars have demonstrated that there was no Alexandrian recension before the time of P75 (late second century) and B (early fourth) and that both these manuscripts represent a relatively pure form of preservation of a relatively pure line of descent from the original text.<\/p>\n<p>The current view about the early text is that certain scribes in Alexandria and\/or scribes familiar with Alexandrian scriptoral practices (perhaps those in Oxyrhynchus) were probably responsible for maintaining a relatively pure text throughout the second, third, and fourth centuries. The Alexandrian scribes, associated with or actually employed by the scriptorium of the great Alexandrian library and\/or members of the scriptorium associated with the catechetical school at Alexandria (called the <em>Didaskelion<\/em>), were trained philologists, grammarians, and textual critics. Their work on the NT was not recensional—that is, it was not an organized emendation of the text. Rather, the work of purification and preservation was probably done here and there by various individuals trained in text criticism. This is apparent in the production of P66, which contains the Gospel of John. This manuscript was probably produced in an Egyptian scriptorium by a novice scribe who made many blunders, which were subsequently corrected by another scribe working in the same scriptorium. The first text produced by the novice could be classified as being very “free,” but the corrected text is far more accurate. (See the discussion on this manuscript above.)<\/p>\n<p>What appears to have happened with the copying of the NT text in the early period in Egypt has been poignantly characterized by Zuntz. He said that when a book was immensely popular (such as Homer’s <em>Iliad<\/em> and <em>Odyssey,<\/em> or Plato’s writings), it was copied with wild enthusiasm by novice and scholar alike. But when grammarians and scribes got ahold of it, they tried to rid it of textual corruption. In the process, however, they may have obliterated some authentic readings, but not many. Thus, the popular text (also known as the “Western text”) could have preserved the original wording in some cases. The popular or free kind of text is displayed in several third-century manuscripts: P9, P37, P40, P45, P72, and P78.<\/p>\n<p>In brief, this popular text is usually displayed in any kind of manuscript that was not produced by Alexandrian influences. This text, given to independence, is not as trustworthy as the Alexandrian text type. But because the Alexandrian text is known as a polished text, the popular text sometimes preserved the original wording. When a variant reading has the support of “Western” and Alexandrian texts, it is very likely original; but when the two are divided, the Alexandrian witnesses more often preserve the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>One dilemma still remains for some textual critics. They cannot explain how a P75\/B-type text coexisted with a Western-type text in the second century. All that can be said is that the Western text generally appears to be inferior to the P75\/B-type text. Of course, this kind of judgment troubles certain scholars, who point out that the esteem given to B and P75 is based on a subjective appreciation of the kind of text they contain (as over against the Western text) rather than on any kind of theoretical reconstruction of the early transmission of the text. This same subjective estimation was at work when Westcott and Hort decided that B was intrinsically superior to D (see their <em>Introduction,<\/em> pp 32–42). Yet the praxis of textual criticism time and again demonstrates that the P75\/B-type text is intrinsically superior to the Western text.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, the manuscripts that represent a pure preservation of the original text are usually those called “Alexandrian.” Some scholars, such as Bruce Metzger, have called the earlier manuscripts “protoAlexandrian,” for they (or manuscripts like them) are thought of as being used to compose an Alexandrian-type text. However, this is looking at things from the perspective of the fourth century. We should look at things from the second century onward and then compare fourth-century manuscripts to those of the second. The second-century manuscripts could still be called “Alexandrian” in the sense that they were produced under Alexandrian influences. Perhaps a distinguishing terminology could be “early Alexandrian” (pre-Constantine) and “later Alexandrian” (post-Constantine). Manuscripts designated as “early Alexandrian” would generally be purer, less editorialized. Manuscripts designated “later Alexandrian” would display editorialization, as well as the influence of other textual traditions.<\/p>\n<p>The “early Alexandrian” text is reflected in many second- and third-century manuscripts. On the top of the list is P75 (c. 175), the work of a competent and careful scribe. Not far behind in quality is P4+P64+P67 (c. 150), the work of an excellent copyist. Other extremely good copies are P1 (c. 200), P20 (early third century), P23 (c. 200), P27 (third century), P28 (third century), P32 (c. 150), P39 (third century), P46 (c. 125), P65 (third century), P66 (in its corrected form—P66<span>c<\/span>; c. 150), P70 (third century), P77 (c. 150), P87 (c. 125), P90 (c. 175), and P91 (c. 200). Several of these manuscripts have been placed in the “strict” category by textual critics Kurt and Barbara Aland—that is, they exhibit “strict” scribal control and therefore are accurate copies of an exemplar, if not the original. These manuscripts are P1, P23, P35, P37, P39, P64\/67, P65, P70, and P75.<\/p>\n<p>The “later Alexandrian” text, which displays editorial polishing, is exhibited in a few manuscripts, such as א (fourth century), T (fifth century), ע (seventh century), L (eighth century), 33 (ninth century), 1739 (a tenth-century manuscript copied from a fourth-century Alexandrian manuscript much like P46), and 579 (13th century). Beginning in the fifth century, Byzantine-type manuscripts began to make their influence in Egypt. Some manuscripts dated around 400 that came from Egypt clearly reflect this influence; Codex Alexandrinus (A) is probably the best example. Other Egyptian manuscripts of this era, such as Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Codex Washingtonianus (W) display large-scale harmonization, which cannot be directly linked to any kind of recension.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the third century, another kind of Greek text came into being and then grew in popularity until it became the dominant text-type throughout Christendom. This is the text-type first instigated by Lucian of Antioch, according to Jerome (in his introduction to his Latin translation of the Gospels). Lucian’s text was a definite recension (i.e., a purposely created edition)—as opposed to the Alexandrian text-type that came about as the result of a process wherein the Alexandrian scribes, upon comparing many manuscripts, attempted to preserve the best text—thereby serving more as textual critics than editors. Of course, the Alexandrians did do some editing—such as we would call copy-editing. The Lucianic text is the outgrowth and culmination of the popular text; it is characterized by smoothness of language, which is achieved by the removal of obscurities and awkward grammatical constructions and by the conflation of variant readings. Lucian (and\/or his associates) must have used many different kinds of manuscripts of varying qualities to produce a harmonized, edited NT text. The kind of editorial work that went into the Lucianic text is what we would call substantive editing.<\/p>\n<p>Lucian’s text was produced prior to the Diocletian persecution (c. 303), during which time many copies of the NT were confiscated and destroyed. Not long after this period of devastation, Constantine came to power and then recognized Christianity as the state religion. There was, of course, a great need for copies of the NT to be made and distributed to churches throughout the Mediterranean world. It was at this time that Lucian’s text began to be propagated by bishops going out from the Antiochan school to churches throughout the East, taking the text with them. Lucian’s text soon became the standard text of the Eastern church and formed the basis for the Byzantine text—and is thus the ultimate authority for the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>While Lucian was forming his recension of the NT text, the Alexandrian text was taking on its final shape. As was mentioned earlier, the formation of the Alexandrian text-type was the result of a process (as opposed to a single editorial recension). The formation of the Alexandrian text involved minor textual criticism (i.e., selecting variant readings among various manuscripts) and copyediting (i.e., producing a readable text). There was far less tampering with the text in the Alexandrian text-type than in the Lucian, and the underlying manuscripts for the Alexandrian text-type were superior to those used by Lucian. Perhaps Hesychius was responsible for giving the Alexandrian text its final shape, and Athanasius of Alexandria may have been the one who made this text the archetypal text for Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>As the years went by, there were fewer and fewer Alexandrian manuscripts produced, and more and more Byzantine manuscripts manufactured. Very few Egyptians continued to read Greek (with the exception of those in St Catherine’s Monastery, the site of the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus), and the rest of the Mediterranean world turned to Latin. It was only those in the Greek-speaking churches in Greece and Byzantium that continued to make copies of the Greek text. For century after century—from the 6th to the 14th—the great majority of NT manuscripts were produced in Byzantium, all bearing the same kind of text. When the first Greek NT was printed (c. 1525), it was based on a Greek text that Erasmus had compiled, using a few late Byzantine manuscripts. This printed text, with minor revisions, became the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>Beginning in the 17th century, earlier manuscripts began to be discovered—manuscripts with a text that differed from that found in the Textus Receptus. Around 1630, Codex Alexandrinus was brought to England. An early fifth-century manuscript, containing the entire NT, it provided a good, early witness to the NT text (it is an especially good witness to the original text of Revelation). Two hundred years later, a German scholar named Constantin von Tischendorf discovered Codex Sinaiticus in St Catherine’s Monastery (located near Mt Sinai). The manuscript, dated around <span>AD<\/span> 360, is one of the two oldest vellum (treated animal hide) manuscripts of the Greek NT. The earliest vellum manuscript, Codex Vaticanus, had been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1481, but it had not been made available to scholars until the middle of the 19th century. This manuscript, dated slightly earlier (<span>AD<\/span> 350) than Codex Sinaiticus, had both the OT and NT in Greek, excluding the last part of the NT (Hebrews 9:15 to Revelation 22:21 and the Pastoral Epistles). A hundred years of textual criticism has determined that this manuscript is one of the most accurate and reliable witnesses to the original text.<\/p>\n<p>Other early and important manuscripts were discovered in the 19th century. Through the tireless labors of men like Constantin von Tischendorf, Samuel Tregelles, and F. H. A. Scrivener, manuscripts such as Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, Codex Zacynthius, and Codex Augiensis were deciphered, collated, and published.<\/p>\n<p>As the various manuscripts were discovered and made public, certain scholars labored to compile a Greek text that would more closely represent the original text than did the Textus Receptus. Around 1700 John Mill produced an improved Textus Receptus, and in the 1730s Johannes Albert Bengel (known as the father of modern textual and philological studies in the NT) published a text that deviated from the Textus Receptus according to the evidence of earlier manuscripts.<\/p>\n<p>In the 1800s certain scholars began to abandon the Textus Receptus. Karl Lachman, a classical philologist, produced a fresh text (in 1831) that represented the fourth-century manuscripts. Samuel Tregelles (self-taught in Latin, Hebrew, and Greek), laboring throughout his entire lifetime, concentrated all of his efforts in publishing one Greek text (which came out in six parts, from 1857 to 1872). As is stated in the introduction to this work, Tregelles’s goal was “to exhibit the text of the NT in the very words in which it has been transmitted on the evidence of ancient authority.” Henry Alford also compiled a Greek text based upon the best and earliest manuscripts. In his preface to <em>The Greek New Testament<\/em> (a multivolume commentary on the Greek NT, published in 1849), Alford said he labored for the “demolition of the unworthy and pedantic reverence for the received text, which stood in the way of all chance of discovering the genuine word of God.”<\/p>\n<p>During this same era, Tischendorf was devoting a lifetime of labor to discovering manuscripts and producing accurate editions of the Greek NT. In a letter to his fiancé he wrote, “I am confronted with a sacred task, the struggle to regain the original form of the NT.” In fulfillment of his desire, he discovered Codex Sinaiticus, deciphered the palimpsest Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, collated countless manuscripts, and produced several editions of the Greek NT (the eighth edition is considered the best).<\/p>\n<p>Aided by the work of the previous scholars, two British men, Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort, worked together for 28 years to produce a volume entitled <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek<\/em> (1881). Along with this publication, they made known their theory (which was chiefly Hort’s) that Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus (along with a few other early manuscripts) represented a text that most closely replicated the original writing. They called this text the Neutral Text. (According to their studies, the Neutral Text described certain manuscripts that had the least amount of textual corruption.) This is the text that Westcott and Hort relied upon for compiling their volume.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th century was a fruitful era for the recovery of the Greek NT; the 20th century, no less so. Those living in the 20th century have witnessed the discovery of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, the Chester Beatty Papyri, and the Bodmer Papyri. To date, there are nearly 100 papyri containing portions of the NT—several of which date from the late first century to the early fourth century. These significant discoveries, providing scholars with many ancient manuscripts, have greatly enhanced the effort to recover the original wording of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>At the beginning of the 20th century, Eberhard Nestle used the best editions of the Greek NT produced in the 19th century to compile a text that represented the majority consensus. The work of making new editions was carried on by his son for several years, and then came under the care of Kurt Aland. The latest edition (the 27th) of Nestle-Aland’s <em>Novum Testamentum Graece<\/em> appeared in 1993. The same Greek text appears in another popular volume published by the United Bible Societies, called the <em>Greek New Testament<\/em> (fourth edition). Aland has argued that the Nestle-Aland text, 27th edition (NA<span>27<\/span>), comes closer to the original text of the NT than did Tischendorf or Westcott and Hort. And in several writings he intimates that NA<span>27<\/span> may very well be the original text. Though few, if any, scholars would agree with this, the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland text is regarded by many as representing the latest and best in textual scholarship.<\/p>\n<h5>New Testament Textual Criticism<\/h5>\n<p>Textual critics working with ancient literature universally acknowledge the supremacy of earlier manuscripts over later ones. Textual critics not working with the NT would love to have the same kind of early witnesses that biblical scholars possess. In fact, many of them work with manuscripts written 1,000 years after the autographs were composed! We all marvel that the Dead Sea Scrolls have provided a text that is nearly 800 years closer to the originals than the Masoretic manuscripts, and yet many of the Dead Sea manuscripts are still over 600 to 800 years removed from the time of original composition. NT textual critics have a great advantage!<\/p>\n<p>The 19th-century NT textual scholars—such as Lachmann, Tregelles, Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort—worked on the basis that the earliest witnesses are the best witnesses. Some textual scholars have continued this line of recovery using the testimony of the earlier witnesses. But many textual scholars since the time of Westcott and Hort have been less inclined to produce editions based on the theory that the earliest reading is the best. Most present-day textual critics are more inclined to endorse the maxim: the reading that is most likely original is the one that best explains the variants.<\/p>\n<p>This maxim (or “canon” as it is sometimes called), as good as it is, produces conflicting results. For example, two scholars, using this same principle to examine the same variant unit, will not agree. One will argue that one variant was produced by a copyist attempting to emulate the author’s style; the other will claim the same variant has to be original because it accords with the author’s style. One will argue that one variant was produced by an orthodox scribe attempting to rid the text of a reading that could be used to promote heterodoxy or heresy; another will claim that the same variant has to be original because it is orthodox and accords with Christian doctrine (thus a heterodox or heretical scribe must have changed it). Furthermore, this principle allows for the possibility that the reading selected for the text can be taken from any manuscript of any date. This can lead to subjective eclecticism.<\/p>\n<p>Modern textual scholars have attempted to temper the subjectivism by employing a method called “reasoned eclecticism.” This kind of eclecticism applies a combination of internal and external considerations, whereby the character of the variants is evaluated in light of the manuscripts’ evidence and vice versa. This is supposed to produce a balanced view and serve as a check against purely subjective tendencies.<\/p>\n<p>The Alands favor the same kind of approach, calling it the local-genealogical method, which is defined as follows:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>It is impossible to proceed from the assumption of a manuscript stemma, and on the basis of a full review and analysis of the relationships obtaining among the variety of interrelated branches in the manuscript tradition, to undertake a recension of the data as one would do with other Greek texts. Decisions must be made one by one, instance by instance. This method has been characterized as eclecticism, but wrongly so. After carefully establishing the variety of readings offered in a passage and the possibilities of their interpretation, it must always then be determined afresh on the basis of external and internal criteria which of these readings (and frequently they are quite numerous) is the original, from which the others may be regarded as derivative. From the perspective of our present knowledge, this “local-genealogical” method (if it must be given a name) is the only one which meets the requirements of the NT textual tradition. (Introduction to <em>Novum Testamentum Graece,<\/em> 26th edition)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The “local-genealogical” method assumes that for any given variation unit any manuscript (or manuscripts) may have preserved the original text. Applying this method produces an extremely uneven documentary presentation of the text. Anyone studying the critical apparatus of NA<span>27<\/span> will detect that there is not an even documentary presentation. The eclecticism is dispersed throughout the text.<\/p>\n<p>“Reasoned eclecticism” and\/or the “local-genealogical” method tend to give priority to internal evidence over external evidence. But it has to be the other way around if we are going to recover the original text. This was Westcott and Hort’s opinion. With respect to their compilation of <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> Hort wrote, “Documentary evidence has been in most cases allowed to confer the place of honour against internal evidence” (<em>The Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> p 17).<\/p>\n<p>In this respect, Westcott and Hort need to be revived. Earnest Colwell was of the same mind when he wrote “Hort Redivivus: A Plea and a Program.” Colwell decried the growing tendency to rely entirely on the internal evidence of readings, without serious consideration of documentary evidence. He called upon scholars to make an attempt to reconstruct a history of the manuscript tradition. The abundance of manuscripts—several of which are very early—will aid scholars in this ongoing task.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, M<span>anuscripts and Text of the (New Testament)<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all copies of any work of literature were made by hand (hence, the name “manuscript”). According to a current tabulation, there are 99 papyrus manuscripts, 257 uncial manuscripts, and 2,795 minuscule manuscripts. We can add 2,209 Greek lectionaries to this list. Therefore, we have over 5,350 manuscript copies of the Greek NT or portions thereof. No other work of Greek literature can boast of such numbers.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantPapyrusManuscripts\">Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>Papyrus is a tall, aquatic reed, the pith of which is cut into strips, laid in a crosswork pattern and glued together to make a page for writing. The papyrus rolls of Egypt have been used as a writing surface since the early third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. The Greeks adopted papyrus around 900 <span>BC<\/span>, and later the Romans adopted its use. However, the oldest extant Greek rolls of papyrus date from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>. Unfortunately, papyrus is perishable, requiring a dry climate for its preservation. That is why so many papyri have been discovered in the desert sands of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The NT papyrus manuscripts (abbreviated as “P”) are generally the earliest manuscripts of the NT. Broadly speaking, the most important ones can be categorized in three groups: the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (from Oxyrhynchus, Egypt), (2) the Beatty Papyri (named after the owner); and (3) the Bodmer Papyri (named after the owner).<\/p>\n<h5>The Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>Beginning in 1898 B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt discovered thousands of papyrus fragments in the ancient rubbish heaps of Oxyrhynchus, Egypt. This site yielded volumes of papyrus fragments containing all sorts of written material (literature, business and legal contracts, letters, etc.) as well as over 40 manuscripts containing portions of the NT. Some of the more noteworthy papyrus manuscripts from Oxyrhynchus are as follows:<\/p>\n<h6>P1 (P. Oxy. 2)<\/h6>\n<p>This late second-century manuscript contains Matthew 1:1-9, 12, 14-20. Grenfell and Hunt in the winter of 1896–97 went to Oxyrhynchus (now called El Bahnasa) in search of ancient Christian documents. P1 was discovered on the second day of the dig. At the time of this discovery, this was the earliest extant copy of any NT portion—at least 100 years earlier than Codex Vaticanus. The copyist of P1 seems to have faithfully followed a very reliable exemplar. Where there are major variants, P1 agrees with the best Alexandrian witnesses, especially B (Codex Vaticanus), from which it rarely varies.<\/p>\n<h6>P5 (P. Oxy. 208 and 1781)<\/h6>\n<p>Two separate portions of this third-century manuscript were unearthed from Oxyrhynchus by Grenfell and Hunt, both from the same papyrus manuscript. The first portion contains John 1:23-31, 33-40 on one fragment and John 20:11-17 on another—probably on the first and last quires of a manuscript containing only the Gospel of John. This portion was published in volume II of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/em> in 1899; the second portion—containing John 16:14-30—was not published until 1922 in volume XV of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>After examining the first portion, Grenfell and Hunt said, “The text is a good one, and appears to have affinities with that of Codex Sinaiticus, with which the papyrus agrees in several readings not found elsewhere.” The papyrus, written in a documentary hand, is marked for its brevity.<\/p>\n<h6>P13 (P. Oxy. 657 and PSI 1292)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated between 175 and 225, contains 12 columns from a roll preserving the text of Hebrews 2:14–5:5; 10:8-22; 10:29–11:13; 11:28–12:7. The text of Hebrews was written in a reformed documentary hand on the back of the papyrus containing the new epitome of Livy. For this reason, some scholars think the manuscript was possibly brought to Egpyt by a Roman official and left behind when he left his post. P13 very often agrees with B, and it supplements B where it is lacking—namely, from Hebrews 9:14 to the end of Hebrews. P13 and P46 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P77 (P. Oxy. 2683 + 4405)<\/h6>\n<p>Dated c. 150–75, this is the earliest manuscript of Matthew (23:30-39). The manuscript is clearly a literary production. It was written in an elegant hand and has what was or became a standard system of chapter division, as well as punctuation and breathing marks. P77 has close textual affinities with Codex Sinaiticus.<\/p>\n<h6>P90 (P. Oxy. 3523)<\/h6>\n<p>This second-century manuscript (c. 150–75) contains John 18:36–19:7. The handwriting (an upright, rounded, elegant script) is much like that found in P66. Furthermore, P90 has more affinity with P66 than with any other single manuscript, though it does not concur with P66 in its entirety.<\/p>\n\n<h6>P. Oxy. 4404<\/h6>\n<p>Containing Matthew 21:34-37, 43, 45, this manuscript could be the earliest extant manuscript of the NT in that the script is early Roman and therefore could be dated to the early second century.<\/p>\n<h5>The Chester Beatty Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased from a dealer in Egypt during the 1930s by Chester Beatty and by the University of Michigan. The three manuscripts in this collection are very early and contain a large portion of the NT text. P45 (c. 200) contains portions of all four Gospels and Acts; P46 (c. 125) has almost all of Paul’s epistles and Hebrews; and P47 (third century) contains Revelation 9–17.<\/p>\n<h6>P45 (Chester Beatty Papyrus I)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has the four Gospels and Acts (Mt 20:24-32; 21:13-19; 25:41–26:39; Mk 4:36–9:31; 11:27–12:28; Lk 6:31–7:7; 9:26–14:33; Jn 4:51–5:2, 21-25; 10:7-25; 10:30–11:10, 18-36, 42-57; Acts 4:27–17:17). The order of books in the original intact manuscript was probably as follows: Matthew, John, Luke, Mark, Acts (the so-called Western order). This manuscript was dated by Kenyon to the early third century, a date that was confirmed by the papyrologists W. Schubart and H. I. Bell. This continues to be the date assigned to this manuscript in modern handbooks on textual criticism and critical editions of the Greek NT, but the consistent formation of certain letters suggests an earlier date—maybe sometime in the late second century.<\/p>\n<p>The scribe of P45 worked without any intention of exactly reproducing his source. He wrote with a great amount of freedom—harmonizing, smoothing out, substituting at will. In short, the scribe did not actually copy words. He saw through the language to its idea-content, and copied that in words of his own choosing, or in rearranged order. Thus, in the scribe of P45 we see an exegete and a paraphraser.<\/p>\n<h6>P46 (Chester Beatty Papyrus II)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has most of Paul’s epistles (excluding the Pastorals) in this order: Romans 5:17–6:14; 8:15–15:9; 15:11–16:27; Hebrews 1:1–13:25; 1 Corinthians 1:1–16:22; 2 Corinthians 1:1–13:13; Ephesians 1:1–6:24; Galatians 1:1–6:18; Philippians 1:1–4:23; Colossians 1:1–4:18; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 1:9–2:3; 5:5-9, 23-28 (with minor lacunae in each of the books).<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript was originally dated to the early third century. But others, since, have dated the manuscript earlier in the second century. The scribe who produced this manuscript used an early, excellent exemplar. He was a professional scribe because there are stichoi notations at the end of several books (see the conclusion of Romans, 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians). The stichoi were used by professionals to note how many lines had been copied for commensurate pay. Most likely, the ex officio of the scriptorium (perhaps connected with a church library) paginated the codex and indicated the stichoi. The scribe himself made a few corrections as he went, and then several other readers made corrections here and there.<\/p>\n<p>The text of P46 shows a strong affinity with B (especially in Ephesians, Colossians, and Hebrews) and next with א (Codex Sinaiticus). P46 agrees much less with the later representatives of the Alexandrian text. In short, P46 is proto-Alexandrian. In Hebrews, P46 and P13 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P47 (Chester Beatty Papyrus III)<\/h6>\n<p>This third-century codex contains Revelation 9:10–17:2. The text of P47 agrees more often with that of Codex Sinaiticus than with any other manuscript (including Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus), though it often shows independence.<\/p>\n<h5>The Bodmer Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased by M. Martin Bodmer from a dealer in Egypt during the 1950s and 1960s. The three important papyri in this collection are P66 (c. 175, containing almost all of John), P72 (third century, having all of 1 and 2 Peter and Jude), and P75 (c. 200, containing large parts of Luke 3—John 15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h4\" id=\"P66\">P66 (Papyrus Bodmer II)<\/p>\n<p>This manuscript contains most of John’s Gospel (1:1–6:11; 6:35–14:26, 29-30; 15:2-26; 16:2-4, 6-7; 16:10–20:20, 22-23; 20:25–21:9). The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11), making it the earliest witness to not include this spurious passage. The manuscript is usually dated as c. 200, but the renowned paleographer Herbert Hunger has argued that P66 should be dated to the first half, if not the first quarter, of the second century.<\/p>\n<p>According to recent studies, it seems evident that P66 has preserved the work of three individuals: the original scribe, a thoroughgoing corrector, and a minor corrector. With a practiced calligraphic hand, the original scribe of P66 wrote in larger print as he went along in order to fill out the codex. The large print throughout indicates that it was written to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The text exhibits the scribe’s knowledge of other portions of Scripture (inasmuch as he harmonized John 6:69 to Matthew 16:16 and John 21:6 to Luke 5:5), his use of standard <em>nomina sacra<\/em> (a way of writing divine names), and his special use of <em>nomina sacra<\/em> for the words “cross” and “crucify.”<\/p>\n<p>The original scribe was quite free in his interaction with the text; he produced several singular readings that reveal his independent interpretation of the text. While the numerous scribal mistakes would seem to indicate that the scribe was inattentive, many of the singular readings—prior to correction—reveal that he was not detached from the narrative of the text. Rather, he became so absorbed in his reading that he often forgot the exact words he was copying. His task as a copyist was to duplicate the exemplar word for word, but this was frustrated by the fact that he was reading the text in logical semantic chunks and often became a coproducer of a new text. As a result, he continually had to stop his reading and make many in-process corrections. But he left several places uncorrected, which were later fixed by the <em>diorthotes<\/em> (official corrector). The finished product is quite good, presenting a text that is very close to the Alexandrian witnesses.<\/p>\n<h6>P72 (Papyrus Bodmer VII–VIII)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated late third century, has an interesting collection of writings in one codex: 1 Peter 1:1–5:14; 2 Peter 1:1–3:18; Jude 1:1-25; the Nativity of Mary, the apocryphal correspondence of Paul to the Corinthians, the eleventh ode of Solomon, Melito’s Homily on the Passover, a fragment of a hymn, the Apology of Phileas, and Psalms 33 and 34.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars think that four scribes took part in producing the entire manuscript. First Peter has clear Alexandrian affinities—especially with B. Second Peter and (especially) Jude display more of an uncontrolled type text (usually associated with the “Western” text), with several independent readings.<\/p>\n<h6>P75 (Papyrus Bodmer XIV–XV)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex contains most of Luke and John (Lk 3:18–4:2; 4:34–5:10; 5:37–18:18; 22:4–24:53; Jn 1:1–11:45, 48-57; 12:3–13:1, 8-9; 14:8-30; 15:7-8.) The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11). The manuscript can be dated to the late second or early third century.<\/p>\n<p>The copyist of P75 was a literate scribe trained in making books. His craftsmanship shows through in his tight calligraphy and controlled copying. The handwriting displayed in this manuscript is typically called by paleographers the common angular type of the late second to early third century. The scribe’s Christianity shows in his abbreviations of the <em>nomina sacra<\/em><em>,<\/em> as well as in his abbreviation of the word “cross.” These are telltale signs of a scribe who belonged to the Christian community. Furthermore, the large typeface indicates that the manuscript was composed to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The scribe even added a system of sectional divisions to aid any would-be lector. Thus, we have a manuscript written by a Christian for other Christians.<\/p>\n<p>There are several indications of the scribe’s Alexandrian orientation. First and foremost is his scriptoral acumen. He is the best of all the early Christian scribes, and his manuscript is an extremely accurate copy. P75 is the work of an extremely disciplined scribe who copied with the intention of being careful and accurate. Scholars generally agree that P75 displays the kind of text that was used in making Codex Vaticanus (there is 87 percent agreement between P75 and B). As such, textual scholars have a high regard for P75’s textual fidelity.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Other Papyrus Manuscripts<\/h5>\n<h6>P4 + P64 + P67<\/h6>\n<p>These three papyrus manuscripts are part of one codex dated <span>AD<\/span> 150–175. The manuscript was the work of a professional scribe, and the text is extremely accurate.<\/p>\n<h6>P32 (Rylands Papyrus 5)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, preserving Titus 1:11-15; 2:3-8, is dated c. 175, making it the earliest extant copy of any of the Pastoral Epistles. P32 shows agreement with א and with F and G. Since F and G (nearly identical manuscripts) go back to the same archetype, it is possible that P32 could be linked to the same source.<\/p>\n<h6>P52 (Rylands Papyrus 457)<\/h6>\n<p>This fragment, containing John 18:31-34, 37-38, is noteworthy because of its date: c. 110–125. Many scholars (F. Kenyon, H. I. Bell, A. Deissmann, and W. H. P. Hatch) have confirmed this dating. The manuscript came from the Fayum or Oxyrhynchus site. It was acquired in 1920 by Grenfell, but it remained unnoticed among hundreds of papyri until 1934, when C. H. Roberts recognized that this fragment preserves a few verses from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantUncialManuscripts\">Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>The manuscripts typically classified as “uncial” are so designated to differentiate them from papyrus manuscripts. In a sense, this is a misnomer because the real difference has to do with the material they are written on—vellum (treated animal hide) as compared to papyrus—not the kind of letters used. Indeed, the papyri are also written in uncials (capital letters), but the term “uncial” typically describes the majuscule lettering that was prominent in fourth-century biblical texts, such as in א, A, B, C.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Sinaiticus (or א)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex contains the entire OT and the NT in this order: the four Gospels, the Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews), Acts, the General Epistles, Revelation. It also includes the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. The codex cannot be earlier than 340 (the year Eusebius died) because the Eusebian sections of the text are indicated in the margins of the Gospels by a contemporary hand. Most scholars date it 350–375.<\/p>\n<p>This codex was discovered by Constantin von Tischendorf in St Catherine’s Monastery (situated at the foot of Mt Sinai). On a visit to the monastery in 1844 he noticed in a wastebasket some parchment leaves that were being used to light the lamps. He was allowed to take this waste paper, which proved to be 43 leaves from various parts of the Greek translation of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>In 1853 he made a second trip to the monastery and found nothing. In 1859, however, on his third trip, he found not only other parts of the OT but also the complete NT. He was finally able to persuade the monastery authorities to present the manuscript to the czar, the great patron of the Greek Catholic Church, who placed it in the Imperial Library in St Petersburg. The czar gave great honors to the monastery and its authorities, and everybody seemed well pleased. Later Tischendorf was charged with having stolen the manuscript from its lawful owners, but the better textual scholars do not accept that story.<\/p>\n\n<p>The manuscript remained in the Imperial Library until 1933, when it was purchased by the British Museum for the huge sum of £100,000 (about $500,000). Textual criticism made the headlines because one manuscript was bought for this much money, raised largely by public subscription during the Great Depression. The manuscript is now on display in the manuscript room of the museum, where it is considered one of its most prized possessions.<\/p>\n<p>The text of Sinaiticus is very closely related to that of Codex Vaticanus. They agree in presenting the purest type of text, usually called the Alexandrian text type. Tischendorf greatly used the textual evidence of Codex Sinaiticus in preparing his critical editions of the Greek NT. Tischendorf thought four scribes had originally produced the codex, whom he named scribes A, B, C, D. After reinvestigation, H. J. Milne and T. C. Skeat identified only three scribes: A (who wrote the historical and poetical books of the OT, as well as most of the NT), B (who wrote the Prophets and the Shepherd of Hermas), and D (who wrote some Psalms, Tobit, Judith, and 4 Maccabees, and redid small sections of the NT). Milne and Skeat demonstrated that scribe A of Codex Vaticanus was likely the same scribe as scribe D of Codex Sinaiticus. If this true, then א is contemporary with B—perhaps produced in the same scriptorium in Alexandria. Codex Sinaiticus provides a fairly reliable witness to the NT; however, the scribe was not as careful as the scribe of B.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Alexandrinus (A)<\/h5>\n<p>This is one of the three most important codices containing early copies of the whole Bible in Greek (the other two being the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus codexes). The name Alexandrinus comes from ancient records suggesting that it was copied in Egypt during the early part of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. The early history of this manuscript and its Egyptian provenance is partially revealed by its flyleaves. A note by Cyril of Lucar (patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople in the 1620s) states that, according to tradition, it was written by Thecla, a noble lady of Egypt shortly after the Council of Nicaea (325) and that her name was originally inscribed at the end of the volume but the last page was lost due to mutilation. An Arabic note of the 13th or 14th century also says that the manuscript was written by “Thecla the martyr.” Another Arabic note says that is was presented to the patriarchal cell of Alexandria (c. 1098). Cyril of Lucar took the manuscript from Alexandria to Constantinople in 1621 and then gave it to Charles I of England in 1627, where it became part of the Royal Library, then later the British Museum.<\/p>\n<p>Only 773 of the original 820 or so pages still exist. The rest were lost as the book was passed down through the centuries. The surviving parts of Alexandrinus contain a Greek translation of the whole OT, the Apocrypha (including four books of Maccabees and Psalm 151), most of the NT, and some early Christian writings (of which the First and Second Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians are the most important).<\/p>\n<p>Frederick Kenyon thought the codex was the work of five scribes, to each of whom he designated a Roman numeral. According to Kenyon, scribes I and II copied the OT; scribe III did Matthew, Mark, 1 Corinthians 10:8—Philemon 1:25; scribe IV did Luke—Acts, General Epistles, Romans 1:1—1 Corinthians 10:8; and scribe V did Revelation. Milne and Skeat, however, argued that the whole codex was the work of two copyists (I and II). W. H. P. Hatch noted that many corrections have been made in the manuscript, most of them at an early date. Some of these corrections were introduced by the scribe himself, and others came from later hands.<\/p>\n<p>Evidently, the scribes of this codex used exemplars of varying quality for various sections of the NT. The exemplar used for the Gospels was of poor quality, reflecting a Byzantine text type. Its testimony in the Epistles is much better, and in Revelation it provides the best witness to the original text.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Codex Vaticanus (B)<\/h5>\n<p>Codex Vaticanus is the Vatican Manuscript, so named because it is the most famous manuscript in the Vatican Library in Rome. This manuscript has been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1475, but it was not made available to scholars, such as Constantin von Tischendorf and Samuel Tregelles, until the middle of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>At one time, the codex contained the whole Greek Bible, including most of the books of the Apocrypha, but it has lost many of its leaves. Originally it must have had about 820 leaves (1,640 pp), but now it has 759—617 in the OT and 142 in the NT. The major gaps of the manuscript are Genesis 1:1–46:28; 2 Samuel 2:5-7, 10-13; Psalms 106:27–138:6; Hebrews 9:14–13:25; the Pastoral Epistles; and Revelation. Each leaf measures ten and a half by ten inches (26.7 by 25.4 centimeters). Each page has three columns (two for the poetical books) with 40 to 44 lines to the column. The manuscript was written by two different scribes. It is dated in the early to middle part of the fourth century. It is not known where the manuscript originated, but it has been in the Vatican Library from the time of its earliest catalog in 1475.<\/p>\n\n<p>When Napoleon conquered Rome, he brought its treasures to Paris, including this manuscript. The scholar Hug identified it and called the attention of other scholars to it. After the downfall of Napoleon, the manuscript was returned to the Vatican Library. Competent textual scholars were not allowed to do careful work on it until a photographic edition was published in 1890. It is now on exhibit in the Vatican Library.<\/p>\n<p>The text of the Vatican Manuscript is much like that of Codex Sinaiticus. These are generally recognized as the two finest examples of the Alexandrian type of Greek text of the NT. The Greek text of the OT is very fine too, but it is not quite so important, as the original language of the OT was Hebrew. Virtually all the textual scholars since the days of Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort (who brought out their Greek Testament, including their theory of textual criticism, in 1881), recognize this neutral type of text as a very early text and a very pure text, an extremely accurate reproduction of what the original text must have been. Westcott and Hort called it a second-century text accurate in 999 out of 1,000 words so far as any matter of translatable difference was concerned. א and B are the finest examples of this type of text, but it is also found in a few other Greek uncial manuscripts, a few of the early translations, and in the writings of a few of the early church fathers. Since the days of Westcott and Hort, their theory has been confirmed by the discovery of some papyrus manuscripts, notably the Bodmer Papyri, discovered in the 1950s.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex is a palimpsest (the original writing was erased and different words written on the same material). It originally contained the entire Bible but now has only parts of six OT books and portions of all NT books except 2 Thessalonians and 2 John. The single-column Bible text, written in the 5th century <span>AD<\/span>, was erased in the 12th century and replaced by a two-column text of a Greek translation of sermons or treatises by a certain Ephraem, a 4th-century Syrian church leader. Such a practice was common in periods of economic depression or when parchment was scarce. The original writing was scraped from the writing surface and the surface smoothed. Then new compositions could be written on the prepared surface. Using chemicals Tischendorf was able to read much of the erased document.<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript may have been brought from the east to Florence by a learned Greek named Andrew John Lascar in the time of Lorenzo de’Medici. Since Lascar was known as Rhyndacenus (from the river Rhyndacus), he probably came from the region of Phrygia (site of ancient Laodicea). Where the manuscript was prior to this is not known. The Ephraemi manuscript was brought to Italy in the early sixth century, where it became the property of the Medici family. Catherine de’Medici took it to France, where it remains today.<\/p>\n<p>The text of this manuscript is mixed—it is compounded from all the major text types, agreeing frequently with the later koine of Byzantine type, which most scholars regard as the least valuable type of NT text.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Bezae (D)<\/h5>\n<p>This is a Greek-Latin diglot containing Matthew—Acts, 3 John, with lacunae. Most scholars date it late fourth or early fifth century (c. 400). Some scholars think the codex was produced in either Egypt or North Africa by a scribe whose mother tongue was Latin. Another scholar (D. C. Parker) has argued that it was copied in Beirut, a center of Latin legal studies during the fifth century, where both Latin and Greek were used. Evidently, it was produced by a scribe who knew Latin better than Greek, and then was corrected by several scribes. In any event, the codex somehow came into the hands of Theodore Beza, French scholar and successor to Calvin. Beza gave it to the Cambridge University Library in 1581.<\/p>\n<p>This codex is probably the most controversial of the NT uncials because of its marked independence. Its many additions, omissions, and alterations (especially in Luke and Acts) are the work of a significant theologian. A few earlier manuscripts (P29, P38, P48, and 0171) appear to be precursors to the type of text found in D, which is considered the principal witness of the Western text-type. Thus, Codex Bezae could be a copy of an earlier revised edition. This reviser must have been a scholar who had a propensity for adding historical, biographical, and geographical details. More than anything, he was intent on filling in gaps in the narrative by adding circumstantial details.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Washingtonianus, or The Freer Gospels (W)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex, dated around 400, has the four Gospels and Acts. It is often referred to as the Freer Gospels—named after its owner, Charles Freer. The codex likely came from the ruins of a monastery near Giza. The handwriting is quite similar to that found in a fifth-century fragment of the book of Enoch found at Akhmim in 1886.<\/p>\n<p>Codex W was copied from a parent manuscript (exemplar) that had been pieced together from several different manuscripts. This is obvious because the textual presentation of W is noticeably variegated and even the stratification of the text is matched by similar variations in paragraphing. The scribe who collated the parent manuscript drew upon various sources to put together his Gospel codex. It is likely that the scribe of the parent manuscript used a text that came from North Africa (the “Western” text) for the first part of Mark, and the scribe of W used manuscripts from Antioch for Matthew and the second part of Luke to fill the gaps in the more ancient manuscript he was copying. Detailed textual analysis reveals the variegated textual stratifications of W, as follows: in Matthew the text is Byzantine; in Mark the text is first Western (1:1–5:30), then Caesarean in Mark 5:31–16:20 (akin to P45); in Luke the text is first Alexandrian (1:1–8:12), then Byzantine. John is more complicated because the first part of John (1:1–5:11), which fills a quire, was the work of a seventh-century scribe who must have replaced a damaged quire. (W<span>s<\/span> designates the work of this scribe.) This first section has a mixture of Alexandrian and Western readings, as does the rest of John.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex 1739<\/h5>\n<p>This tenth-century codex has Acts and the Epistles. The manuscript was discovered at Mt Athos in 1879 by E. von der Goltz. The manuscript has strong textual affinities with P46, B, 1739, Coptic Sahidic, Coptic Boharic, Clement, and Origen. The relationship between P46, B, and 1739 is remarkable because 1739 is a tenth-century manuscript that was copied from a fourth-century manuscript of excellent quality. According to a colophon, the scribe of 1739 for the Pauline Epistles followed a manuscript that came from Caesarea in the library of Pamphilus and that contained an Origenian text. The three manuscripts, P46, B, and 1739, form a clear textual line: from P46 (early second century) to B (early fourth century) to 1739 (tenth century based on fourth century).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTextoftheNewTestament\">The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The original text of the NT is the “published” text—that is, the text as it was in its final edited form and released for circulation in the Christian community. For some books of the NT, there is little difference between the original composition and the published text. After the author wrote or dictated his work, he (or an associate) made the final editorial corrections and then released it for distribution. As is the case for books published in modern times, so in ancient times, the original writing of the author is not always the same as what is published—due to the editorial process. Nonetheless, the author is credited with the final edited text, and the published book is attributed to the author and considered the autograph. This autograph is the original published text. Of course, in this case the autographs do not exist, so scholars have to rely on copies to recover or reconstruct the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars think it is impossible to recover the original text of the Greek NT because they have not been able to reconstruct the early history of textual transmission. Other modern scholars are less pessimistic but still quite guarded in affirming the possiblity. And yet others are optimistic because we possess many early manuscripts of excellent quality and because our view of the early period of textual transmission has been getting clearer and clearer.<\/p>\n<p>When we speak of recovering the text of the NT, we are referring to individual books of the NT, not to the entire volume per se, because each book (or group of books—such as the Pauline Epistles) had its own unique history of textual transmission. The earliest extant copy of an entire NT text is the one preserved in Codex Sinaiticus (written about <span>AD<\/span> 375). (Codex Vaticanus lacks the Pastoral Epistles and Revelation.) Prior to the fourth century, the NT was circulated in its various parts: as a single book or a group of books (such as the four Gospels or the Pauline Epistles). Manuscripts from the late first century to the third century have been found with individual books such as Matthew (P1, P77), Mark (P88), Luke (P69), John (P5, 22, 52, 66), Acts (P91), Revelation (P18, 47), or containing groups of books, such as the four Gospels with Acts (P45), the Pauline Epistles (P30, P46, P92), the Petrine Epistles and Jude (P72). Each of the books of the NT has had its own textual history and has been preserved with varying degrees of accuracy. Nonetheless, all of the books were altered from the original state due to the process of manual copying decade after decade and century after century. And the text of each of the books needs to be recovered.<\/p>\n<p>The NT text was affected with many variations in its early history. In the late first and early second century, the oral traditions and the written word existed side by side with equal status—especially with respect to the material of the Gospels. Often, the text was changed by scribes attempting to conform the written message to the oral tradition or attempting to conform one Gospel account to another. By the end of the second century and into the third century, many of the significant variant readings entered into the textual stream.<\/p>\n<p>The early period of textual transmission, however, was not completely marred by textual infidelity and scribal liberty. There were those scribes who copied the text faithfully and reverently—that is, they recognized that they were copying a sacred text written by an apostle. The formalization of canonization did not ascribe this sacredness to the text. Canonization came about as the result of common, historical recognition of the sacredness of various NT books. Certain NT books, such as the four Gospels, Acts, and Paul’s epistles were considered inspired literature from the onset. As such, certain scribes copied them with reverential fidelity.<\/p>\n<p>Other scribes, however, felt free to make “improvements” in the text—either in the interest of doctrine and harmonization or due to the influence of a competitive oral tradition. The manuscripts produced in such a manner created a kind of “popular text”—i.e., an uncontrolled text. (This text type used to be called the “Western text,” but scholars now recognize this as a misnomer.)<\/p>\n<p>During the second century, there were a few men who produced recensions of the NT text. According to Eusebius, Theodotus (and his followers) altered the text for their own purposes. In the middle of the second century, Marcion expunged his copies of the Gospel according to Luke of all references to the Jewish background of Jesus, and Tatian’s harmony of the Gospels contains several textual alterations that gave support to ascetic views. And yet another recendor created the D-type text for the Gospels and Acts. This theologically minded redactor, living in the late second or third century, created a text that had short-lived popularity. Three third-century papyri, P29, P38, P48, each containing a portion from the book of Acts, may be precursors to the D-type text in Acts. But there are other papyri containing portions of Acts that provide even earlier testimony to a purer form of Acts—namely, P45 (c. 150) and P91 (c. 200), thereby showing that the D-type text of Acts did not necessarily antedate the purer form.<\/p>\n<p>Besides these endeavors—which are all noted for creating textual impurities—there was no recension of the NT text in the second century. Rather, it was a period in which there were scribes who exercised freedom in copying and those who demonstrated acumen. The manuscripts produced by the latter are those that come closest to preserving the original text. A prime example of an accurate late-second-century manuscript is P75.<\/p>\n<p>It is a well-known fact that the text produced by the scribe of P75 is a very accurate manuscript. It is also well-known that P75 was the kind of manuscript used in formulating Codex Vaticanus—the readings of P75 and B are remarkably similar. Prior to the discovery of P75, certain scholars thought Codex Vaticanus was the work of a fourth-century recension; others (chiefly Hort) thought it must trace back to a very early and accurate copy. Hort said that Codex Vaticanus preserves “not only a very ancient text, but a very pure line of a very ancient text” (Westcott and Hort, <em>The<\/em> <em>Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> pp 250–51). P75 appears to have shown that Hort was right.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the discovery of P75, many textual scholars were convinced that the second- and third-century papyri displayed a text in flux, a text characterized only by individual independence. The Chester Beatty Papyrus, P45, and the Bodmer Papyri, P66 and P72 (in 2 Peter and Jude), show this kind of independence. Scholars thought that scribes at Alexandria must have used several such texts to produce a good recension—as is exhibited in Codex Vaticanus. But we now know that Codex Vaticanus was not the result of a scholarly recension, resulting from editorial selection across the various textual histories. Rather, it is now quite clear that Codex Vaticanus was simply a copy (with some modifications) of a manuscript much like P75, not a fourth-century recension.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars may point out that this does not automatically mean that P75 and B represent the original text. What it does mean, they say, is that we have a second-century manuscript showing great affinity with a fourth-century manuscript whose quality has been highly esteemed. But various scholars have demonstrated that there was no Alexandrian recension before the time of P75 (late second century) and B (early fourth) and that both these manuscripts represent a relatively pure form of preservation of a relatively pure line of descent from the original text.<\/p>\n<p>The current view about the early text is that certain scribes in Alexandria and\/or scribes familiar with Alexandrian scriptoral practices (perhaps those in Oxyrhynchus) were probably responsible for maintaining a relatively pure text throughout the second, third, and fourth centuries. The Alexandrian scribes, associated with or actually employed by the scriptorium of the great Alexandrian library and\/or members of the scriptorium associated with the catechetical school at Alexandria (called the <em>Didaskelion<\/em>), were trained philologists, grammarians, and textual critics. Their work on the NT was not recensional—that is, it was not an organized emendation of the text. Rather, the work of purification and preservation was probably done here and there by various individuals trained in text criticism. This is apparent in the production of P66, which contains the Gospel of John. This manuscript was probably produced in an Egyptian scriptorium by a novice scribe who made many blunders, which were subsequently corrected by another scribe working in the same scriptorium. The first text produced by the novice could be classified as being very “free,” but the corrected text is far more accurate. (See the discussion on this manuscript above.)<\/p>\n<p>What appears to have happened with the copying of the NT text in the early period in Egypt has been poignantly characterized by Zuntz. He said that when a book was immensely popular (such as Homer’s <em>Iliad<\/em> and <em>Odyssey,<\/em> or Plato’s writings), it was copied with wild enthusiasm by novice and scholar alike. But when grammarians and scribes got ahold of it, they tried to rid it of textual corruption. In the process, however, they may have obliterated some authentic readings, but not many. Thus, the popular text (also known as the “Western text”) could have preserved the original wording in some cases. The popular or free kind of text is displayed in several third-century manuscripts: P9, P37, P40, P45, P72, and P78.<\/p>\n<p>In brief, this popular text is usually displayed in any kind of manuscript that was not produced by Alexandrian influences. This text, given to independence, is not as trustworthy as the Alexandrian text type. But because the Alexandrian text is known as a polished text, the popular text sometimes preserved the original wording. When a variant reading has the support of “Western” and Alexandrian texts, it is very likely original; but when the two are divided, the Alexandrian witnesses more often preserve the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>One dilemma still remains for some textual critics. They cannot explain how a P75\/B-type text coexisted with a Western-type text in the second century. All that can be said is that the Western text generally appears to be inferior to the P75\/B-type text. Of course, this kind of judgment troubles certain scholars, who point out that the esteem given to B and P75 is based on a subjective appreciation of the kind of text they contain (as over against the Western text) rather than on any kind of theoretical reconstruction of the early transmission of the text. This same subjective estimation was at work when Westcott and Hort decided that B was intrinsically superior to D (see their <em>Introduction,<\/em> pp 32–42). Yet the praxis of textual criticism time and again demonstrates that the P75\/B-type text is intrinsically superior to the Western text.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, the manuscripts that represent a pure preservation of the original text are usually those called “Alexandrian.” Some scholars, such as Bruce Metzger, have called the earlier manuscripts “protoAlexandrian,” for they (or manuscripts like them) are thought of as being used to compose an Alexandrian-type text. However, this is looking at things from the perspective of the fourth century. We should look at things from the second century onward and then compare fourth-century manuscripts to those of the second. The second-century manuscripts could still be called “Alexandrian” in the sense that they were produced under Alexandrian influences. Perhaps a distinguishing terminology could be “early Alexandrian” (pre-Constantine) and “later Alexandrian” (post-Constantine). Manuscripts designated as “early Alexandrian” would generally be purer, less editorialized. Manuscripts designated “later Alexandrian” would display editorialization, as well as the influence of other textual traditions.<\/p>\n<p>The “early Alexandrian” text is reflected in many second- and third-century manuscripts. On the top of the list is P75 (c. 175), the work of a competent and careful scribe. Not far behind in quality is P4+P64+P67 (c. 150), the work of an excellent copyist. Other extremely good copies are P1 (c. 200), P20 (early third century), P23 (c. 200), P27 (third century), P28 (third century), P32 (c. 150), P39 (third century), P46 (c. 125), P65 (third century), P66 (in its corrected form—P66<span>c<\/span>; c. 150), P70 (third century), P77 (c. 150), P87 (c. 125), P90 (c. 175), and P91 (c. 200). Several of these manuscripts have been placed in the “strict” category by textual critics Kurt and Barbara Aland—that is, they exhibit “strict” scribal control and therefore are accurate copies of an exemplar, if not the original. These manuscripts are P1, P23, P35, P37, P39, P64\/67, P65, P70, and P75.<\/p>\n<p>The “later Alexandrian” text, which displays editorial polishing, is exhibited in a few manuscripts, such as א (fourth century), T (fifth century), ע (seventh century), L (eighth century), 33 (ninth century), 1739 (a tenth-century manuscript copied from a fourth-century Alexandrian manuscript much like P46), and 579 (13th century). Beginning in the fifth century, Byzantine-type manuscripts began to make their influence in Egypt. Some manuscripts dated around 400 that came from Egypt clearly reflect this influence; Codex Alexandrinus (A) is probably the best example. Other Egyptian manuscripts of this era, such as Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Codex Washingtonianus (W) display large-scale harmonization, which cannot be directly linked to any kind of recension.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the third century, another kind of Greek text came into being and then grew in popularity until it became the dominant text-type throughout Christendom. This is the text-type first instigated by Lucian of Antioch, according to Jerome (in his introduction to his Latin translation of the Gospels). Lucian’s text was a definite recension (i.e., a purposely created edition)—as opposed to the Alexandrian text-type that came about as the result of a process wherein the Alexandrian scribes, upon comparing many manuscripts, attempted to preserve the best text—thereby serving more as textual critics than editors. Of course, the Alexandrians did do some editing—such as we would call copy-editing. The Lucianic text is the outgrowth and culmination of the popular text; it is characterized by smoothness of language, which is achieved by the removal of obscurities and awkward grammatical constructions and by the conflation of variant readings. Lucian (and\/or his associates) must have used many different kinds of manuscripts of varying qualities to produce a harmonized, edited NT text. The kind of editorial work that went into the Lucianic text is what we would call substantive editing.<\/p>\n<p>Lucian’s text was produced prior to the Diocletian persecution (c. 303), during which time many copies of the NT were confiscated and destroyed. Not long after this period of devastation, Constantine came to power and then recognized Christianity as the state religion. There was, of course, a great need for copies of the NT to be made and distributed to churches throughout the Mediterranean world. It was at this time that Lucian’s text began to be propagated by bishops going out from the Antiochan school to churches throughout the East, taking the text with them. Lucian’s text soon became the standard text of the Eastern church and formed the basis for the Byzantine text—and is thus the ultimate authority for the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>While Lucian was forming his recension of the NT text, the Alexandrian text was taking on its final shape. As was mentioned earlier, the formation of the Alexandrian text-type was the result of a process (as opposed to a single editorial recension). The formation of the Alexandrian text involved minor textual criticism (i.e., selecting variant readings among various manuscripts) and copyediting (i.e., producing a readable text). There was far less tampering with the text in the Alexandrian text-type than in the Lucian, and the underlying manuscripts for the Alexandrian text-type were superior to those used by Lucian. Perhaps Hesychius was responsible for giving the Alexandrian text its final shape, and Athanasius of Alexandria may have been the one who made this text the archetypal text for Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>As the years went by, there were fewer and fewer Alexandrian manuscripts produced, and more and more Byzantine manuscripts manufactured. Very few Egyptians continued to read Greek (with the exception of those in St Catherine’s Monastery, the site of the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus), and the rest of the Mediterranean world turned to Latin. It was only those in the Greek-speaking churches in Greece and Byzantium that continued to make copies of the Greek text. For century after century—from the 6th to the 14th—the great majority of NT manuscripts were produced in Byzantium, all bearing the same kind of text. When the first Greek NT was printed (c. 1525), it was based on a Greek text that Erasmus had compiled, using a few late Byzantine manuscripts. This printed text, with minor revisions, became the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>Beginning in the 17th century, earlier manuscripts began to be discovered—manuscripts with a text that differed from that found in the Textus Receptus. Around 1630, Codex Alexandrinus was brought to England. An early fifth-century manuscript, containing the entire NT, it provided a good, early witness to the NT text (it is an especially good witness to the original text of Revelation). Two hundred years later, a German scholar named Constantin von Tischendorf discovered Codex Sinaiticus in St Catherine’s Monastery (located near Mt Sinai). The manuscript, dated around <span>AD<\/span> 360, is one of the two oldest vellum (treated animal hide) manuscripts of the Greek NT. The earliest vellum manuscript, Codex Vaticanus, had been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1481, but it had not been made available to scholars until the middle of the 19th century. This manuscript, dated slightly earlier (<span>AD<\/span> 350) than Codex Sinaiticus, had both the OT and NT in Greek, excluding the last part of the NT (Hebrews 9:15 to Revelation 22:21 and the Pastoral Epistles). A hundred years of textual criticism has determined that this manuscript is one of the most accurate and reliable witnesses to the original text.<\/p>\n<p>Other early and important manuscripts were discovered in the 19th century. Through the tireless labors of men like Constantin von Tischendorf, Samuel Tregelles, and F. H. A. Scrivener, manuscripts such as Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, Codex Zacynthius, and Codex Augiensis were deciphered, collated, and published.<\/p>\n<p>As the various manuscripts were discovered and made public, certain scholars labored to compile a Greek text that would more closely represent the original text than did the Textus Receptus. Around 1700 John Mill produced an improved Textus Receptus, and in the 1730s Johannes Albert Bengel (known as the father of modern textual and philological studies in the NT) published a text that deviated from the Textus Receptus according to the evidence of earlier manuscripts.<\/p>\n<p>In the 1800s certain scholars began to abandon the Textus Receptus. Karl Lachman, a classical philologist, produced a fresh text (in 1831) that represented the fourth-century manuscripts. Samuel Tregelles (self-taught in Latin, Hebrew, and Greek), laboring throughout his entire lifetime, concentrated all of his efforts in publishing one Greek text (which came out in six parts, from 1857 to 1872). As is stated in the introduction to this work, Tregelles’s goal was “to exhibit the text of the NT in the very words in which it has been transmitted on the evidence of ancient authority.” Henry Alford also compiled a Greek text based upon the best and earliest manuscripts. In his preface to <em>The Greek New Testament<\/em> (a multivolume commentary on the Greek NT, published in 1849), Alford said he labored for the “demolition of the unworthy and pedantic reverence for the received text, which stood in the way of all chance of discovering the genuine word of God.”<\/p>\n<p>During this same era, Tischendorf was devoting a lifetime of labor to discovering manuscripts and producing accurate editions of the Greek NT. In a letter to his fiancé he wrote, “I am confronted with a sacred task, the struggle to regain the original form of the NT.” In fulfillment of his desire, he discovered Codex Sinaiticus, deciphered the palimpsest Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, collated countless manuscripts, and produced several editions of the Greek NT (the eighth edition is considered the best).<\/p>\n<p>Aided by the work of the previous scholars, two British men, Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort, worked together for 28 years to produce a volume entitled <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek<\/em> (1881). Along with this publication, they made known their theory (which was chiefly Hort’s) that Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus (along with a few other early manuscripts) represented a text that most closely replicated the original writing. They called this text the Neutral Text. (According to their studies, the Neutral Text described certain manuscripts that had the least amount of textual corruption.) This is the text that Westcott and Hort relied upon for compiling their volume.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th century was a fruitful era for the recovery of the Greek NT; the 20th century, no less so. Those living in the 20th century have witnessed the discovery of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, the Chester Beatty Papyri, and the Bodmer Papyri. To date, there are nearly 100 papyri containing portions of the NT—several of which date from the late first century to the early fourth century. These significant discoveries, providing scholars with many ancient manuscripts, have greatly enhanced the effort to recover the original wording of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>At the beginning of the 20th century, Eberhard Nestle used the best editions of the Greek NT produced in the 19th century to compile a text that represented the majority consensus. The work of making new editions was carried on by his son for several years, and then came under the care of Kurt Aland. The latest edition (the 27th) of Nestle-Aland’s <em>Novum Testamentum Graece<\/em> appeared in 1993. The same Greek text appears in another popular volume published by the United Bible Societies, called the <em>Greek New Testament<\/em> (fourth edition). Aland has argued that the Nestle-Aland text, 27th edition (NA<span>27<\/span>), comes closer to the original text of the NT than did Tischendorf or Westcott and Hort. And in several writings he intimates that NA<span>27<\/span> may very well be the original text. Though few, if any, scholars would agree with this, the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland text is regarded by many as representing the latest and best in textual scholarship.<\/p>\n<h5>New Testament Textual Criticism<\/h5>\n<p>Textual critics working with ancient literature universally acknowledge the supremacy of earlier manuscripts over later ones. Textual critics not working with the NT would love to have the same kind of early witnesses that biblical scholars possess. In fact, many of them work with manuscripts written 1,000 years after the autographs were composed! We all marvel that the Dead Sea Scrolls have provided a text that is nearly 800 years closer to the originals than the Masoretic manuscripts, and yet many of the Dead Sea manuscripts are still over 600 to 800 years removed from the time of original composition. NT textual critics have a great advantage!<\/p>\n<p>The 19th-century NT textual scholars—such as Lachmann, Tregelles, Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort—worked on the basis that the earliest witnesses are the best witnesses. Some textual scholars have continued this line of recovery using the testimony of the earlier witnesses. But many textual scholars since the time of Westcott and Hort have been less inclined to produce editions based on the theory that the earliest reading is the best. Most present-day textual critics are more inclined to endorse the maxim: the reading that is most likely original is the one that best explains the variants.<\/p>\n<p>This maxim (or “canon” as it is sometimes called), as good as it is, produces conflicting results. For example, two scholars, using this same principle to examine the same variant unit, will not agree. One will argue that one variant was produced by a copyist attempting to emulate the author’s style; the other will claim the same variant has to be original because it accords with the author’s style. One will argue that one variant was produced by an orthodox scribe attempting to rid the text of a reading that could be used to promote heterodoxy or heresy; another will claim that the same variant has to be original because it is orthodox and accords with Christian doctrine (thus a heterodox or heretical scribe must have changed it). Furthermore, this principle allows for the possibility that the reading selected for the text can be taken from any manuscript of any date. This can lead to subjective eclecticism.<\/p>\n<p>Modern textual scholars have attempted to temper the subjectivism by employing a method called “reasoned eclecticism.” This kind of eclecticism applies a combination of internal and external considerations, whereby the character of the variants is evaluated in light of the manuscripts’ evidence and vice versa. This is supposed to produce a balanced view and serve as a check against purely subjective tendencies.<\/p>\n<p>The Alands favor the same kind of approach, calling it the local-genealogical method, which is defined as follows:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>It is impossible to proceed from the assumption of a manuscript stemma, and on the basis of a full review and analysis of the relationships obtaining among the variety of interrelated branches in the manuscript tradition, to undertake a recension of the data as one would do with other Greek texts. Decisions must be made one by one, instance by instance. This method has been characterized as eclecticism, but wrongly so. After carefully establishing the variety of readings offered in a passage and the possibilities of their interpretation, it must always then be determined afresh on the basis of external and internal criteria which of these readings (and frequently they are quite numerous) is the original, from which the others may be regarded as derivative. From the perspective of our present knowledge, this “local-genealogical” method (if it must be given a name) is the only one which meets the requirements of the NT textual tradition. (Introduction to <em>Novum Testamentum Graece,<\/em> 26th edition)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The “local-genealogical” method assumes that for any given variation unit any manuscript (or manuscripts) may have preserved the original text. Applying this method produces an extremely uneven documentary presentation of the text. Anyone studying the critical apparatus of NA<span>27<\/span> will detect that there is not an even documentary presentation. The eclecticism is dispersed throughout the text.<\/p>\n<p>“Reasoned eclecticism” and\/or the “local-genealogical” method tend to give priority to internal evidence over external evidence. But it has to be the other way around if we are going to recover the original text. This was Westcott and Hort’s opinion. With respect to their compilation of <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> Hort wrote, “Documentary evidence has been in most cases allowed to confer the place of honour against internal evidence” (<em>The Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> p 17).<\/p>\n<p>In this respect, Westcott and Hort need to be revived. Earnest Colwell was of the same mind when he wrote “Hort Redivivus: A Plea and a Program.” Colwell decried the growing tendency to rely entirely on the internal evidence of readings, without serious consideration of documentary evidence. He called upon scholars to make an attempt to reconstruct a history of the manuscript tradition. The abundance of manuscripts—several of which are very early—will aid scholars in this ongoing task.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Manuscripts and Text of the (New Testament) Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar. Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all ...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Manuscripts and Text of the (New Testament) Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar. Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all ...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11206,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Eternal Life","title_en":"Eternal Life","content_ro":"<h3>ETERNAL LIFE<\/h3>\n<p>Mode of existence referred to in Scripture characterized by either timelessness or immortality; kind of life attributed to God and distributed to believers. The perspective of the biblical writers flowed from an understanding of a living God who existed prior to the world’s creation and who will continue to exist when the end of time arrives. God’s gift to those who are obedient and responsible to him is designated as “eternal life” or some such synonym. John’s Gospel provides the most definitive material on eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “eternal life” occurs only once in the Greek version of the OT (Dn 12:2, with the basic meaning of “the life of the age,” designating the life of the age beyond the resurrection from the dead). The primary meaning of “life” in the OT, however, is the quality of well-being in earthly existence.<\/p>\n<p>In the intertestamental period, the rabbinic distinction between “this age” and “the age which is to come” emphasized that the concept of life in the new age consists of a qualitative, rather than simply a quantitative, distinction from the present age.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word translated “eternal” is derived from the word for “age” or “eon.” The setting of the NT within the context of Judaism, with its concept of a living God and the consequent promise of “the age which is to come,” gives depth and color to the meaning of the adjective “eternal.” Jesus Christ’s coming as God’s definitive revelation brings the possibility of the qualities of life in the future messianic age into present reality.<\/p>\n<p>The rich young ruler came to Jesus and asked for directions on how to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). He was obviously thinking of resurrection in the age to come. Jesus answered in the same terms (v 30).<\/p>\n<p>In his response to the rich young ruler, Jesus equated the reception of eternal life with entrance into the kingdom of God (Mk 10:23-25). The kingdom of God is not simply a future event but is already inaugurated in Jesus’ life, ministry, and teachings. The kingdom is a gift of life available while the follower still lives within the present age. Many of Jesus’ parables emphasize this point (e.g., those in Mt 13). The Beatitudes in the Sermon on the Mount (5:3-12) reinforce the concept of a present blessedness that includes salvation, forgiveness, and righteousness. Thus eternal life is a present blessing available to those who submit to God’s reign and are enjoying the blessing of this new era of salvation before the final consummation at the present age’s end.<\/p>\n<p>The definitive discussion of eternal life comes from John’s Gospel. John’s purpose delineates the crucial significance of the concept: “But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name” (Jn 20:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). The earliest Johannine reference to eternal life is found in John 3:15.<\/p>\n<p>John clearly shared in the Jewish expectation of the age to come with its anticipated blessings (e.g., Jn 3:36; 4:14; 5:29, 39; 6:27; 12:25). Eternal life is defined by the special gifts of the messianic age when it arrives at consummation. Lazarus’s resurrection (ch 11) was a living parable demonstrating the future life available to those who trust in Christ. Martha, before her brother’s actual resurrection, asserted her belief that Lazarus would be raised on the last day (v 24). Jesus responded that he himself is the resurrection and the life, and that those who believe in him will never die, even if they die physically (vv 25-26).<\/p>\n<p>The central emphasis of John’s Gospel, however, does not lie in the anticipated future but in the present experience of that future life. The life of the age to come is already available in Christ to the believer. The metaphors with which Jesus defined his own mission emphasize the present new life: living water that is a spring of water welling up to eternal life (Jn 4:10-14); living bread that satisfies the world’s spiritual hunger (6:35-40); the light of the world who leads his followers into the light of life (8:12); the good shepherd who brings abundant life (10:10); the life giver who raises the dead (11:25); the way, the truth, and the life (14:6); and the genuine vine who sustains those who abide in him (15:5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was very careful to note that the accomplishment of his mission did not rest in his own nature and ability but in the Father who sent him. Jesus’ submission to the Father highlights again the fact that life is a gift of God. Those who believe in the Son of God are recipients of the life that God alone gives—eternal life. Thus the promise of resurrection for all believers, made explicit in Lazarus’s resurrection and guaranteed in Christ’s resurrection as the “firstfruits” (in Pauline terminology, <span>kjv<\/span> 1 Cor 15:23), is the natural consequence of God’s gift (Jn 5:26-29).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus added further content to the concept of eternal life by connecting it with knowing the true God (Jn 17:3). In Greek thought, knowledge referred to the result of either contemplation or mystical ecstasy. In the OT, however, knowledge meant experience, relationship, fellowship, and concern (cf. Jer 31:34). This connotation of knowledge as intimate relationship is underlined by the usage of the verb form to designate sexual relations between male and female (cf. Gn 4:1). Jesus stated, “I am the good shepherd; I know my own and my own know me, as the Father knows me and I know the Father” (Jn 10:14-15, <span>rsv<\/span>). The intimate and mutual relationship of Father and Son is the model for the relationship of the Son and his disciples. This knowledge does not come by education or manipulation of the mind but by revelation through the Son (1:18; cf. 14:7).<\/p>\n<p>A brief survey of the primary elements in the concept of eternal life clearly shows that it is not simply an endless or everlasting life. Although there are no final boundaries to eternal life, the Bible’s primary emphasis is on the quality of life, especially its divine elements. Eternal life is the importation of the qualities of the age to come into the present through the revelation of a faithful God in Christ, and it brings knowledge of God’s relationship with him.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Life; New Creation, New Creature; Regeneration.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ETERNAL LIFE<\/h3>\n<p>Mode of existence referred to in Scripture characterized by either timelessness or immortality; kind of life attributed to God and distributed to believers. The perspective of the biblical writers flowed from an understanding of a living God who existed prior to the world’s creation and who will continue to exist when the end of time arrives. God’s gift to those who are obedient and responsible to him is designated as “eternal life” or some such synonym. John’s Gospel provides the most definitive material on eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “eternal life” occurs only once in the Greek version of the OT (Dn 12:2, with the basic meaning of “the life of the age,” designating the life of the age beyond the resurrection from the dead). The primary meaning of “life” in the OT, however, is the quality of well-being in earthly existence.<\/p>\n<p>In the intertestamental period, the rabbinic distinction between “this age” and “the age which is to come” emphasized that the concept of life in the new age consists of a qualitative, rather than simply a quantitative, distinction from the present age.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word translated “eternal” is derived from the word for “age” or “eon.” The setting of the NT within the context of Judaism, with its concept of a living God and the consequent promise of “the age which is to come,” gives depth and color to the meaning of the adjective “eternal.” Jesus Christ’s coming as God’s definitive revelation brings the possibility of the qualities of life in the future messianic age into present reality.<\/p>\n<p>The rich young ruler came to Jesus and asked for directions on how to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). He was obviously thinking of resurrection in the age to come. Jesus answered in the same terms (v 30).<\/p>\n<p>In his response to the rich young ruler, Jesus equated the reception of eternal life with entrance into the kingdom of God (Mk 10:23-25). The kingdom of God is not simply a future event but is already inaugurated in Jesus’ life, ministry, and teachings. The kingdom is a gift of life available while the follower still lives within the present age. Many of Jesus’ parables emphasize this point (e.g., those in Mt 13). The Beatitudes in the Sermon on the Mount (5:3-12) reinforce the concept of a present blessedness that includes salvation, forgiveness, and righteousness. Thus eternal life is a present blessing available to those who submit to God’s reign and are enjoying the blessing of this new era of salvation before the final consummation at the present age’s end.<\/p>\n<p>The definitive discussion of eternal life comes from John’s Gospel. John’s purpose delineates the crucial significance of the concept: “But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name” (Jn 20:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). The earliest Johannine reference to eternal life is found in John 3:15.<\/p>\n<p>John clearly shared in the Jewish expectation of the age to come with its anticipated blessings (e.g., Jn 3:36; 4:14; 5:29, 39; 6:27; 12:25). Eternal life is defined by the special gifts of the messianic age when it arrives at consummation. Lazarus’s resurrection (ch 11) was a living parable demonstrating the future life available to those who trust in Christ. Martha, before her brother’s actual resurrection, asserted her belief that Lazarus would be raised on the last day (v 24). Jesus responded that he himself is the resurrection and the life, and that those who believe in him will never die, even if they die physically (vv 25-26).<\/p>\n<p>The central emphasis of John’s Gospel, however, does not lie in the anticipated future but in the present experience of that future life. The life of the age to come is already available in Christ to the believer. The metaphors with which Jesus defined his own mission emphasize the present new life: living water that is a spring of water welling up to eternal life (Jn 4:10-14); living bread that satisfies the world’s spiritual hunger (6:35-40); the light of the world who leads his followers into the light of life (8:12); the good shepherd who brings abundant life (10:10); the life giver who raises the dead (11:25); the way, the truth, and the life (14:6); and the genuine vine who sustains those who abide in him (15:5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was very careful to note that the accomplishment of his mission did not rest in his own nature and ability but in the Father who sent him. Jesus’ submission to the Father highlights again the fact that life is a gift of God. Those who believe in the Son of God are recipients of the life that God alone gives—eternal life. Thus the promise of resurrection for all believers, made explicit in Lazarus’s resurrection and guaranteed in Christ’s resurrection as the “firstfruits” (in Pauline terminology, <span>kjv<\/span> 1 Cor 15:23), is the natural consequence of God’s gift (Jn 5:26-29).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus added further content to the concept of eternal life by connecting it with knowing the true God (Jn 17:3). In Greek thought, knowledge referred to the result of either contemplation or mystical ecstasy. In the OT, however, knowledge meant experience, relationship, fellowship, and concern (cf. Jer 31:34). This connotation of knowledge as intimate relationship is underlined by the usage of the verb form to designate sexual relations between male and female (cf. Gn 4:1). Jesus stated, “I am the good shepherd; I know my own and my own know me, as the Father knows me and I know the Father” (Jn 10:14-15, <span>rsv<\/span>). The intimate and mutual relationship of Father and Son is the model for the relationship of the Son and his disciples. This knowledge does not come by education or manipulation of the mind but by revelation through the Son (1:18; cf. 14:7).<\/p>\n<p>A brief survey of the primary elements in the concept of eternal life clearly shows that it is not simply an endless or everlasting life. Although there are no final boundaries to eternal life, the Bible’s primary emphasis is on the quality of life, especially its divine elements. Eternal life is the importation of the qualities of the age to come into the present through the revelation of a faithful God in Christ, and it brings knowledge of God’s relationship with him.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Life; New Creation, New Creature; Regeneration.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ETERNAL LIFE Mode of existence referred to in Scripture characterized by either timelessness or immortality; kind of life attributed to God and distributed to believers. The perspective of the biblical writers flowed from an understanding of a living God who existed prior to the world’s creation and who will continue to exist when the end of time arrives. God’s gift to those who are obedient and responsible to him is designated as “eternal life” or some such synonym. John’s Gospel provides th...","summary_en":"ETERNAL LIFE Mode of existence referred to in Scripture characterized by either timelessness or immortality; kind of life attributed to God and distributed to believers. The perspective of the biblical writers flowed from an understanding of a living God who existed prior to the world’s creation and who will continue to exist when the end of time arrives. God’s gift to those who are obedient and responsible to him is designated as “eternal life” or some such synonym. John’s Gospel provides th...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11837,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Faith","title_en":"Faith","content_ro":"<h3>FAITH<\/h3>\n<p>Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DefinitionofFaith\">Definition of Faith<\/p>\n<p>In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a whole and embodied in personal life. In 2 Timothy 4:7, Paul witnesses to having “kept the faith.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheOldTestament\">Faith in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT also strongly emphasizes faith as confidence in God’s covenant or in the covenant God made with Abraham and his descendants. The call of Abraham and the promise that his descendants would be used in the history of redemption became the basis of the narratives of the OT, being seen as the working out of that covenant. Once the nation Israel was brought into being, God sustained and protected it. The exodus from Egypt is a prominent indication that God was at work restoring his people to the Promised Land. The obedience of the people of God as the proper expression of faith is seen clearly in the OT. Without seeing God, his people believed and obeyed him. Abraham left his native land to go into unknown territory. The people of Israel left Egypt following the leadership of God to a land they could not see. The promise of God gave them courage to possess the land promised to them. After the exodus, the covenant of Abraham was confirmed with the people of Israel by the sprinkling of blood (Ex 24:6-7). There was to be strict obedience to God’s commands as an expression of faith. This response of human faith to the Lord’s faithfulness was national and collective. There also were commands to, and instances of, personal faith.<\/p>\n<p>Not only the narrative and legal portions of the OT but also the poetic and prophetic writings emphasize faith. The Psalms abound in expressions of personal confidence in the Lord even in dark times. Habakkuk points out that “the righteous shall live by his faith” (Hb 2:4). From such instances it is clear that, as the Lord’s education of Israel proceeded, the matter of faith in God’s faithfulness became more and more a matter of individual and personal response, and it is in the Prophets that several ingredients—such as trust, obedience, fear, and certainty—blend into the understanding of such personal faith.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheNewTestament\">Faith in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>As over against the OT, where the accent is on the faithfulness of God, in the NT the emphasis is placed on the active, responding faith of the hearer to the promised, final revelation in the Messiah, Jesus. Both verb and noun regularly describe the adequate response of people to Jesus’ word and to the gospel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of the synoptic Gospels (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>) is the use of faith without identifying its object: “If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed” (Mt 17:20); “When Jesus saw their faith” (Mk 2:5); “Your faith has saved you” (Lk 7:50). Jesus is portrayed as one who by his work and word opens the door to faith and makes faith possible. The question is not whether the faith is in Jesus or in the Father; the implication is undoubtedly both, but as with every true bearer of the Word of God, the eye of faith is turned to the One who sends.<\/p>\n<p>On more than one occasion, Jesus denies the request for a miracle to substantiate his words (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1-4). Faith is response to the Word alone without any supporting props. No sign is to be given but the sign of Jonah. In the story of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:19-31), Jesus denies the request for the spectacular and insists that the hearer must respond to the word given to him (cf. Jn 20:29). The Word demands self-surrender and commitment. Hence, the very nature of the Word and of faith becomes an obstacle to the proud and the powerful.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is the medium by which the power of God is made visible. It moves mountains, heals the sick, and is the means of entrance into the kingdom. It may be mingled with doubt, as with the father who sought healing for his son (“I believe; help my unbelief!” [Mk 9:24]), or as with John the Baptist in prison, who, even with his doubts, was confirmed by Jesus as the greatest of the offspring of woman (Mt 11:2-15). Peter’s (and the other disciples’) perception was faulty, but Jesus affirms Peter’s confession as the foundation stone of the church. The synoptic Gospels portray the early faith of the disciples in all its limitations and weaknesses, yet it is still faith in that it is their positive response to Jesus’ word and work.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fourth Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>Faith is an especially significant concept in the Gospel of John (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), though the word (in the Greek) occurs only as a verb. Quite often the reference has to do with the acceptance that something is true, that is, simple credence, or belief: “Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me” (Jn 14:11); “If you believed Moses, you would believe me” (Jn 5:46).<\/p>\n<p>Even more significant is the special expression “to believe into” in the sense of putting one’s trust into another. The particular form of the expression is without parallel before the fourth Gospel and may well express the strong sense of personal trust in the eternal Word made flesh. In John 3:16, whoever puts trust in him has eternal life. Those who put their trust in him are given power to become sons of God—to be born of God (Jn 1:12). They will never thirst (6:35); they will live, even though they die (11:25).<\/p>\n<p>In other places, John speaks of trust or faith in an absolute sense, that is, without referring to the one in whom trust is placed. In John 11:15 Jesus arrives after the death of Lazarus and is glad “in order that you might believe.” The outcome is going to be faith. Similarly, in the prologue (1:7), John the Baptist bears witness in order that through him all might believe. As Jesus satisfies the doubt of Thomas concerning the resurrection, he says, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe” (20:29). In these and other passages the fundamental outcome of Jesus’ witness to himself is trust.<\/p>\n<p>Faith and knowledge are closely related. In John 6:69 Peter says, “We have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” In his priestly prayer Jesus says that eternal life is to “know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (Jn 17:3). Also, God is seen through the eyes of faith. No one has ever seen God, but the Only Begotten has revealed him (1:18). He who has seen Jesus has seen the Father (14:9).<\/p>\n<p>To believe is also expressed in the verb “receive.” Those who receive Christ are given power to become the sons of God (Jn 1:12). Trust is that form of knowing or seeing by which the glory of God (1:14; 17:4) is made present.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In Paul’s letters (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), he writes about faith from a number of angles. He sets faith over against “works of the law” as the only and true basis for righteousness (Rom 1–4; Gal 1–4) and appeals to Abraham to prove his point: “Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him for righteousness” (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:5; Gal 3:6). This is entirely apart from the law (Rom 3:21); righteousness is the gift of God through faith in Christ, specifically in his atoning work. Behind Paul’s conviction lies his awareness of the radical and pervasive sinfulness of humans that renders each one helpless. Humanity is dead in sin but is made alive by faith in the word and work of Jesus mediated through the gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Faith, then, is faith in Jesus Christ. The number of metaphors Paul employs to describe the consequences of faith is staggering. It is by faith that believers are justified (Rom 5:1), reconciled (2 Cor 5:18), redeemed (Eph 1:7), made alive (2:5), adopted into the family of God (Rom 8:15-16), re-created (2 Cor 5:17), transported into a new kingdom (Col 1:13), and set free (Gal 5:1). Faith is, for Paul, the <em>sine qua non<\/em> of every aspect of salvation, from the grace that convicts to the receiving of the full inheritance at the coming of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s letters, faith is bound up with love so that the great exponent of justification by faith becomes also the articulate exponent of distinctive Christian love. To say that faith is indispensable to salvation is only part of the truth, for faith expresses itself through love: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love” (Gal 5:6); “If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing” (1 Cor 13:2). Love is both the genesis and the ultimate expression of faith. Hence, even for Paul there can be no <em>total<\/em> separation between faith and works. This love of which Paul speaks is the essential fruit of the Spirit through whom the life of faith is lived. Only by virtue of the indwelling Spirit does faith find expression in love.<\/p>\n<h5>General Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>James speaks of faith as being completed by works (Jas 2:22). He opposed that concept of faith that thinks primarily of creedal assent, of believing that something is true without acting upon it. James, like Paul, assumes the primacy of faith, but he is warning against those who would draw wrong conclusions. Faith apart from works is not faith; it is barren (v 20). The practical dimension of faith is the burden of much of this epistle.<\/p>\n<p>The writer of Hebrews recognizes that faith has always been characteristic of the people of God and their specially called leaders. Faith makes substantial what is otherwise nebulous and uncertain; it makes evidential what is not visible. By faith the people of God have a more certain ground for their lives and their actions than the world is able to discern (Heb 11:1). The great cloud of witnesses (12:1) bear testimony by their faith to the faithfulness of God.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is opened up by the Word of God, finds expression through the Holy Spirit who is given, and bears witness to the lordship of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FAITH<\/h3>\n<p>Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DefinitionofFaith\">Definition of Faith<\/p>\n<p>In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a whole and embodied in personal life. In 2 Timothy 4:7, Paul witnesses to having “kept the faith.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheOldTestament\">Faith in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT also strongly emphasizes faith as confidence in God’s covenant or in the covenant God made with Abraham and his descendants. The call of Abraham and the promise that his descendants would be used in the history of redemption became the basis of the narratives of the OT, being seen as the working out of that covenant. Once the nation Israel was brought into being, God sustained and protected it. The exodus from Egypt is a prominent indication that God was at work restoring his people to the Promised Land. The obedience of the people of God as the proper expression of faith is seen clearly in the OT. Without seeing God, his people believed and obeyed him. Abraham left his native land to go into unknown territory. The people of Israel left Egypt following the leadership of God to a land they could not see. The promise of God gave them courage to possess the land promised to them. After the exodus, the covenant of Abraham was confirmed with the people of Israel by the sprinkling of blood (Ex 24:6-7). There was to be strict obedience to God’s commands as an expression of faith. This response of human faith to the Lord’s faithfulness was national and collective. There also were commands to, and instances of, personal faith.<\/p>\n<p>Not only the narrative and legal portions of the OT but also the poetic and prophetic writings emphasize faith. The Psalms abound in expressions of personal confidence in the Lord even in dark times. Habakkuk points out that “the righteous shall live by his faith” (Hb 2:4). From such instances it is clear that, as the Lord’s education of Israel proceeded, the matter of faith in God’s faithfulness became more and more a matter of individual and personal response, and it is in the Prophets that several ingredients—such as trust, obedience, fear, and certainty—blend into the understanding of such personal faith.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheNewTestament\">Faith in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>As over against the OT, where the accent is on the faithfulness of God, in the NT the emphasis is placed on the active, responding faith of the hearer to the promised, final revelation in the Messiah, Jesus. Both verb and noun regularly describe the adequate response of people to Jesus’ word and to the gospel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of the synoptic Gospels (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>) is the use of faith without identifying its object: “If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed” (Mt 17:20); “When Jesus saw their faith” (Mk 2:5); “Your faith has saved you” (Lk 7:50). Jesus is portrayed as one who by his work and word opens the door to faith and makes faith possible. The question is not whether the faith is in Jesus or in the Father; the implication is undoubtedly both, but as with every true bearer of the Word of God, the eye of faith is turned to the One who sends.<\/p>\n<p>On more than one occasion, Jesus denies the request for a miracle to substantiate his words (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1-4). Faith is response to the Word alone without any supporting props. No sign is to be given but the sign of Jonah. In the story of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:19-31), Jesus denies the request for the spectacular and insists that the hearer must respond to the word given to him (cf. Jn 20:29). The Word demands self-surrender and commitment. Hence, the very nature of the Word and of faith becomes an obstacle to the proud and the powerful.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is the medium by which the power of God is made visible. It moves mountains, heals the sick, and is the means of entrance into the kingdom. It may be mingled with doubt, as with the father who sought healing for his son (“I believe; help my unbelief!” [Mk 9:24]), or as with John the Baptist in prison, who, even with his doubts, was confirmed by Jesus as the greatest of the offspring of woman (Mt 11:2-15). Peter’s (and the other disciples’) perception was faulty, but Jesus affirms Peter’s confession as the foundation stone of the church. The synoptic Gospels portray the early faith of the disciples in all its limitations and weaknesses, yet it is still faith in that it is their positive response to Jesus’ word and work.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fourth Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>Faith is an especially significant concept in the Gospel of John (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), though the word (in the Greek) occurs only as a verb. Quite often the reference has to do with the acceptance that something is true, that is, simple credence, or belief: “Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me” (Jn 14:11); “If you believed Moses, you would believe me” (Jn 5:46).<\/p>\n<p>Even more significant is the special expression “to believe into” in the sense of putting one’s trust into another. The particular form of the expression is without parallel before the fourth Gospel and may well express the strong sense of personal trust in the eternal Word made flesh. In John 3:16, whoever puts trust in him has eternal life. Those who put their trust in him are given power to become sons of God—to be born of God (Jn 1:12). They will never thirst (6:35); they will live, even though they die (11:25).<\/p>\n<p>In other places, John speaks of trust or faith in an absolute sense, that is, without referring to the one in whom trust is placed. In John 11:15 Jesus arrives after the death of Lazarus and is glad “in order that you might believe.” The outcome is going to be faith. Similarly, in the prologue (1:7), John the Baptist bears witness in order that through him all might believe. As Jesus satisfies the doubt of Thomas concerning the resurrection, he says, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe” (20:29). In these and other passages the fundamental outcome of Jesus’ witness to himself is trust.<\/p>\n<p>Faith and knowledge are closely related. In John 6:69 Peter says, “We have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” In his priestly prayer Jesus says that eternal life is to “know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (Jn 17:3). Also, God is seen through the eyes of faith. No one has ever seen God, but the Only Begotten has revealed him (1:18). He who has seen Jesus has seen the Father (14:9).<\/p>\n<p>To believe is also expressed in the verb “receive.” Those who receive Christ are given power to become the sons of God (Jn 1:12). Trust is that form of knowing or seeing by which the glory of God (1:14; 17:4) is made present.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In Paul’s letters (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), he writes about faith from a number of angles. He sets faith over against “works of the law” as the only and true basis for righteousness (Rom 1–4; Gal 1–4) and appeals to Abraham to prove his point: “Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him for righteousness” (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:5; Gal 3:6). This is entirely apart from the law (Rom 3:21); righteousness is the gift of God through faith in Christ, specifically in his atoning work. Behind Paul’s conviction lies his awareness of the radical and pervasive sinfulness of humans that renders each one helpless. Humanity is dead in sin but is made alive by faith in the word and work of Jesus mediated through the gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Faith, then, is faith in Jesus Christ. The number of metaphors Paul employs to describe the consequences of faith is staggering. It is by faith that believers are justified (Rom 5:1), reconciled (2 Cor 5:18), redeemed (Eph 1:7), made alive (2:5), adopted into the family of God (Rom 8:15-16), re-created (2 Cor 5:17), transported into a new kingdom (Col 1:13), and set free (Gal 5:1). Faith is, for Paul, the <em>sine qua non<\/em> of every aspect of salvation, from the grace that convicts to the receiving of the full inheritance at the coming of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s letters, faith is bound up with love so that the great exponent of justification by faith becomes also the articulate exponent of distinctive Christian love. To say that faith is indispensable to salvation is only part of the truth, for faith expresses itself through love: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love” (Gal 5:6); “If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing” (1 Cor 13:2). Love is both the genesis and the ultimate expression of faith. Hence, even for Paul there can be no <em>total<\/em> separation between faith and works. This love of which Paul speaks is the essential fruit of the Spirit through whom the life of faith is lived. Only by virtue of the indwelling Spirit does faith find expression in love.<\/p>\n<h5>General Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>James speaks of faith as being completed by works (Jas 2:22). He opposed that concept of faith that thinks primarily of creedal assent, of believing that something is true without acting upon it. James, like Paul, assumes the primacy of faith, but he is warning against those who would draw wrong conclusions. Faith apart from works is not faith; it is barren (v 20). The practical dimension of faith is the burden of much of this epistle.<\/p>\n<p>The writer of Hebrews recognizes that faith has always been characteristic of the people of God and their specially called leaders. Faith makes substantial what is otherwise nebulous and uncertain; it makes evidential what is not visible. By faith the people of God have a more certain ground for their lives and their actions than the world is able to discern (Heb 11:1). The great cloud of witnesses (12:1) bear testimony by their faith to the faithfulness of God.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is opened up by the Word of God, finds expression through the Holy Spirit who is given, and bears witness to the lordship of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FAITH Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God. Definition of Faith In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a...","summary_en":"FAITH Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God. Definition of Faith In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17073,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"“I Am” Sayings","title_en":"“I Am” Sayings","content_ro":"<h3>“I AM” SAYINGS<\/h3>\n<p>Self-proclamations made by Jesus in the Gospel of John.<\/p>\n<p>One of the distinctive elements of the teaching of Jesus is the way Jesus expresses important truths in terms of his own personal character and mission. These statements begin with the words “I am” and then continue to express a deep theological thought in terms of metaphorical statement. This method of teaching is preserved for us in the Gospel of John alone. While Matthew, Mark, and Luke emphasize Jesus’ mode of teaching in the form of the parable, John pictures Jesus as teaching in discourses. These discourses often find an “I am” statement as the key expression of the central thought.<\/p>\n<p>The “I am” statements found in the Gospel of John are the bread of life or the living bread (6:35, 48, 51), the light of the world (8:12; see also 9:5), the gate (10:7, 9), the good shepherd (10:11, 14), the resurrection and the life (11:25), the way, the truth and the life (14:6), and the vine (15:1, 5).<\/p>\n<p>Each of these statements follows a basic pattern. They are written as metaphors in which one of the key elements is to be the Christ expressed as “I am.” The meaning of the metaphor is to be drawn chiefly from the explanatory statement connected with it. Thus when Jesus says, “I am the light of the world,” the explanatory statement follows, “So if you follow me, you won’t be stumbling through the darkness, for living light will flood your path” (<span>tlb<\/span>). This latter statement is intended to help a person interpret the metaphor. Most statements have such interpretive elements joined to them.<\/p>\n<p>These metaphorical statements often complement Jesus’ miracles. The statement and a miracle each contribute to the understanding of the other. Thus when Jesus proclaims that he is the light of the world, he proceeds to bring sight to the blind man. The controversy that follows between the blind man and the Pharisees shows that the man has received spiritual sight as well as physical. Before Jesus raises Lazarus from the dead, he tells Martha that he is the resurrection and the life. The raising of Lazarus is intended to show Jesus’ power to give life now and to demonstrate his power to do what he proclaimed he was able to do. After Jesus had fed the 5,000, he declared that he was the living bread that had come from heaven. Each of these miracles is interpreted by the metaphorical “I am” statement. Each statement is intended to give the miracle meaning for the ministry of Jesus. They show us that Jesus’ miracles were not just acts of power or mercy but actions demonstrating the meaning of his ministry and teaching.<\/p>\n<p>Many theologians consider the “I am” formula to reflect an identification of deity found in the OT (see God, Names of). When Moses was called, he asked God to identify himself in such a way that Moses might gain acceptance from the Hebrew people. God revealed himself to Moses as the great “<span>I Am<\/span>.” Moses was to tell the Israelites that “<span>I Am<\/span> sent me to you” (Ex 3:13-14). From this “<span>I Am<\/span>” the name Yahweh is derived. Many believe that Jesus used this same formula from the OT to relate his deity. The “I am” statements in John’s Gospel help the reader identify Jesus as divine, as God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>“I AM” SAYINGS<\/h3>\n<p>Self-proclamations made by Jesus in the Gospel of John.<\/p>\n<p>One of the distinctive elements of the teaching of Jesus is the way Jesus expresses important truths in terms of his own personal character and mission. These statements begin with the words “I am” and then continue to express a deep theological thought in terms of metaphorical statement. This method of teaching is preserved for us in the Gospel of John alone. While Matthew, Mark, and Luke emphasize Jesus’ mode of teaching in the form of the parable, John pictures Jesus as teaching in discourses. These discourses often find an “I am” statement as the key expression of the central thought.<\/p>\n<p>The “I am” statements found in the Gospel of John are the bread of life or the living bread (6:35, 48, 51), the light of the world (8:12; see also 9:5), the gate (10:7, 9), the good shepherd (10:11, 14), the resurrection and the life (11:25), the way, the truth and the life (14:6), and the vine (15:1, 5).<\/p>\n<p>Each of these statements follows a basic pattern. They are written as metaphors in which one of the key elements is to be the Christ expressed as “I am.” The meaning of the metaphor is to be drawn chiefly from the explanatory statement connected with it. Thus when Jesus says, “I am the light of the world,” the explanatory statement follows, “So if you follow me, you won’t be stumbling through the darkness, for living light will flood your path” (<span>tlb<\/span>). This latter statement is intended to help a person interpret the metaphor. Most statements have such interpretive elements joined to them.<\/p>\n<p>These metaphorical statements often complement Jesus’ miracles. The statement and a miracle each contribute to the understanding of the other. Thus when Jesus proclaims that he is the light of the world, he proceeds to bring sight to the blind man. The controversy that follows between the blind man and the Pharisees shows that the man has received spiritual sight as well as physical. Before Jesus raises Lazarus from the dead, he tells Martha that he is the resurrection and the life. The raising of Lazarus is intended to show Jesus’ power to give life now and to demonstrate his power to do what he proclaimed he was able to do. After Jesus had fed the 5,000, he declared that he was the living bread that had come from heaven. Each of these miracles is interpreted by the metaphorical “I am” statement. Each statement is intended to give the miracle meaning for the ministry of Jesus. They show us that Jesus’ miracles were not just acts of power or mercy but actions demonstrating the meaning of his ministry and teaching.<\/p>\n<p>Many theologians consider the “I am” formula to reflect an identification of deity found in the OT (see God, Names of). When Moses was called, he asked God to identify himself in such a way that Moses might gain acceptance from the Hebrew people. God revealed himself to Moses as the great “<span>I Am<\/span>.” Moses was to tell the Israelites that “<span>I Am<\/span> sent me to you” (Ex 3:13-14). From this “<span>I Am<\/span>” the name Yahweh is derived. Many believe that Jesus used this same formula from the OT to relate his deity. The “I am” statements in John’s Gospel help the reader identify Jesus as divine, as God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"“I AM” SAYINGS Self-proclamations made by Jesus in the Gospel of John. One of the distinctive elements of the teaching of Jesus is the way Jesus expresses important truths in terms of his own personal character and mission. These statements begin with the words “I am” and then continue to express a deep theological thought in terms of metaphorical statement. This method of teaching is preserved for us in the Gospel of John alone. While Matthew, Mark, and Luke emphasize Jesus’ mode of teaching...","summary_en":"“I AM” SAYINGS Self-proclamations made by Jesus in the Gospel of John. One of the distinctive elements of the teaching of Jesus is the way Jesus expresses important truths in terms of his own personal character and mission. These statements begin with the words “I am” and then continue to express a deep theological thought in terms of metaphorical statement. This method of teaching is preserved for us in the Gospel of John alone. While Matthew, Mark, and Luke emphasize Jesus’ mode of teaching...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20216,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of John","title_en":"Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","summary_en":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23523,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"the Lord’s Supper","title_en":"the Lord’s Supper","content_ro":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","summary_en":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56444,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:35","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:35","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:35<\/strong> Jesus’ <em>I am<\/em> statements in John depict Jesus’ identity and ministry (see also 4:26; 8:12; 9:5; 10:7-9, 11-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1-5). Jesus purposefully used a phrase that would make his listeners think of the Old Testament name for God (Exod 3:14). • <em>I am the bread of life:<\/em> Jesus is the true manna that descended from God (John 6:38). He satisfies the spiritual hunger of those who believe in him (cp. 4:10-13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:35<\/strong> Jesus’ <em>I am<\/em> statements in John depict Jesus’ identity and ministry (see also 4:26; 8:12; 9:5; 10:7-9, 11-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1-5). Jesus purposefully used a phrase that would make his listeners think of the Old Testament name for God (Exod 3:14). • <em>I am the bread of life:<\/em> Jesus is the true manna that descended from God (John 6:38). He satisfies the spiritual hunger of those who believe in him (cp. 4:10-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:35 Jesus’ I am statements in John depict Jesus’ identity and ministry (see also 4:26; 8:12; 9:5; 10:7-9, 11-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1-5). Jesus purposefully used a phrase that would make his listeners think of the Old Testament name for God (Exod 3:14). • I am the bread of life: Jesus is the true manna that descended from God (John 6:38). He satisfies the spiritual hunger of those who believe in him (cp. 4:10-13).","summary_en":"6:35 Jesus’ I am statements in John depict Jesus’ identity and ministry (see also 4:26; 8:12; 9:5; 10:7-9, 11-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1-5). Jesus purposefully used a phrase that would make his listeners think of the Old Testament name for God (Exod 3:14). • I am the bread of life: Jesus is the true manna that descended from God (John 6:38). He satisfies the spiritual hunger of those who believe in him (cp. 4:10-13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84070,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:35","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:35","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:35<\/strong> Jesus’ <em>I am<\/em> statements in John depict Jesus’ identity and ministry (see also 4:26; 8:12; 9:5; 10:7-9, 11-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1-5). Jesus purposefully used a phrase that would make his listeners think of the Old Testament name for God (Exod 3:14). • <em>I am the bread of life:<\/em> Jesus is the true manna that descended from God (John 6:38). He satisfies the spiritual hunger of those who believe in him (cp. 4:10-13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:35<\/strong> Jesus’ <em>I am<\/em> statements in John depict Jesus’ identity and ministry (see also 4:26; 8:12; 9:5; 10:7-9, 11-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1-5). Jesus purposefully used a phrase that would make his listeners think of the Old Testament name for God (Exod 3:14). • <em>I am the bread of life:<\/em> Jesus is the true manna that descended from God (John 6:38). He satisfies the spiritual hunger of those who believe in him (cp. 4:10-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:35 Jesus’ I am statements in John depict Jesus’ identity and ministry (see also 4:26; 8:12; 9:5; 10:7-9, 11-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1-5). Jesus purposefully used a phrase that would make his listeners think of the Old Testament name for God (Exod 3:14). • I am the bread of life: Jesus is the true manna that descended from God (John 6:38). He satisfies the spiritual hunger of those who believe in him (cp. 4:10-13).","summary_en":"6:35 Jesus’ I am statements in John depict Jesus’ identity and ministry (see also 4:26; 8:12; 9:5; 10:7-9, 11-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1-5). Jesus purposefully used a phrase that would make his listeners think of the Old Testament name for God (Exod 3:14). • I am the bread of life: Jesus is the true manna that descended from God (John 6:38). He satisfies the spiritual hunger of those who believe in him (cp. 4:10-13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111696,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:35","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:35","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:35<\/strong> Jesus’ <em>I am<\/em> statements in John depict Jesus’ identity and ministry (see also 4:26; 8:12; 9:5; 10:7-9, 11-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1-5). Jesus purposefully used a phrase that would make his listeners think of the Old Testament name for God (Exod 3:14). • <em>I am the bread of life:<\/em> Jesus is the true manna that descended from God (John 6:38). He satisfies the spiritual hunger of those who believe in him (cp. 4:10-13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:35<\/strong> Jesus’ <em>I am<\/em> statements in John depict Jesus’ identity and ministry (see also 4:26; 8:12; 9:5; 10:7-9, 11-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1-5). Jesus purposefully used a phrase that would make his listeners think of the Old Testament name for God (Exod 3:14). • <em>I am the bread of life:<\/em> Jesus is the true manna that descended from God (John 6:38). He satisfies the spiritual hunger of those who believe in him (cp. 4:10-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:35 Jesus’ I am statements in John depict Jesus’ identity and ministry (see also 4:26; 8:12; 9:5; 10:7-9, 11-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1-5). Jesus purposefully used a phrase that would make his listeners think of the Old Testament name for God (Exod 3:14). • I am the bread of life: Jesus is the true manna that descended from God (John 6:38). He satisfies the spiritual hunger of those who believe in him (cp. 4:10-13).","summary_en":"6:35 Jesus’ I am statements in John depict Jesus’ identity and ministry (see also 4:26; 8:12; 9:5; 10:7-9, 11-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1-5). Jesus purposefully used a phrase that would make his listeners think of the Old Testament name for God (Exod 3:14). • I am the bread of life: Jesus is the true manna that descended from God (John 6:38). He satisfies the spiritual hunger of those who believe in him (cp. 4:10-13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139322,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:35","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:35","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:35<\/strong> Jesus’ <em>I am<\/em> statements in John depict Jesus’ identity and ministry (see also 4:26; 8:12; 9:5; 10:7-9, 11-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1-5). Jesus purposefully used a phrase that would make his listeners think of the Old Testament name for God (Exod 3:14). • <em>I am the bread of life:<\/em> Jesus is the true manna that descended from God (John 6:38). He satisfies the spiritual hunger of those who believe in him (cp. 4:10-13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v -5\"><strong>6:35<\/strong> Jesus’ <em>I am<\/em> statements in John depict Jesus’ identity and ministry (see also 4:26; 8:12; 9:5; 10:7-9, 11-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1-5). Jesus purposefully used a phrase that would make his listeners think of the Old Testament name for God (Exod 3:14). • <em>I am the bread of life:<\/em> Jesus is the true manna that descended from God (John 6:38). He satisfies the spiritual hunger of those who believe in him (cp. 4:10-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:35 Jesus’ I am statements in John depict Jesus’ identity and ministry (see also 4:26; 8:12; 9:5; 10:7-9, 11-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1-5). Jesus purposefully used a phrase that would make his listeners think of the Old Testament name for God (Exod 3:14). • I am the bread of life: Jesus is the true manna that descended from God (John 6:38). He satisfies the spiritual hunger of those who believe in him (cp. 4:10-13).","summary_en":"6:35 Jesus’ I am statements in John depict Jesus’ identity and ministry (see also 4:26; 8:12; 9:5; 10:7-9, 11-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1-5). Jesus purposefully used a phrase that would make his listeners think of the Old Testament name for God (Exod 3:14). • I am the bread of life: Jesus is the true manna that descended from God (John 6:38). He satisfies the spiritual hunger of those who believe in him (cp. 4:10-13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60605,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65825,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65881,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","title_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","summary_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65987,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus","title_en":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3> “<span>I Am<\/span>” Sayings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identity of the speaker. As an example from another Gospel, Jesus says in the Sermon on the Mount, “You have heard that it was said . . . but <em>I <\/em>[<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>] say” (see Matt 5:22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44, etc.). The inclusion of the personal pronoun sharpens the contrast between Jesus’ instruction and that of Moses. This remarkable phrase underscores the authority of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>At other times, Jesus’ use of “I am” is grammatically odd, occurring without a predicate. For example, “Before Abraham was even born, <span>I Am<\/span>” (John 8:58). <em>Before Abraham, Jesus was what?<\/em> (cp. 8:28, 59; 13:19). The best explanation of this odd expression comes from the Old Testament. When Moses met the Lord on Mount Sinai, he was eager to discover God’s name (Exod 3:6, 13-14). God tells him that his name is <span>Yhwh<\/span>, four Hebrew letters that express existence. When the Old Testament was later translated into Greek, this name for God was translated as “<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>”—emphatic “<span>I Am<\/span>.” The Greek Old Testament continued to use this title (see Isa 43:25; 51:12; 52:6). Any Jewish reader who knew the Old Testament would understand what Jesus meant when he employed the divine “<span>I Am<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus not only represents God. The “<span>I Am<\/span>” statements demonstrate Jesus’ divine status and showing that he can work, speak, and act in the Father’s stead. He is no mere man. He is the Word of God dwelling in human flesh. His voice is the voice of the Father, and his life is the life of God made visible in human form. The use of the expression “<span>I Am<\/span>” is thus a striking and powerful way to express who Jesus is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 6:35, 48; 8:12, 58; 9:510:7-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1, 5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3> “<span>I Am<\/span>” Sayings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identity of the speaker. As an example from another Gospel, Jesus says in the Sermon on the Mount, “You have heard that it was said . . . but <em>I <\/em>[<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>] say” (see Matt 5:22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44, etc.). The inclusion of the personal pronoun sharpens the contrast between Jesus’ instruction and that of Moses. This remarkable phrase underscores the authority of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>At other times, Jesus’ use of “I am” is grammatically odd, occurring without a predicate. For example, “Before Abraham was even born, <span>I Am<\/span>” (John 8:58). <em>Before Abraham, Jesus was what?<\/em> (cp. 8:28, 59; 13:19). The best explanation of this odd expression comes from the Old Testament. When Moses met the Lord on Mount Sinai, he was eager to discover God’s name (Exod 3:6, 13-14). God tells him that his name is <span>Yhwh<\/span>, four Hebrew letters that express existence. When the Old Testament was later translated into Greek, this name for God was translated as “<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>”—emphatic “<span>I Am<\/span>.” The Greek Old Testament continued to use this title (see Isa 43:25; 51:12; 52:6). Any Jewish reader who knew the Old Testament would understand what Jesus meant when he employed the divine “<span>I Am<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus not only represents God. The “<span>I Am<\/span>” statements demonstrate Jesus’ divine status and showing that he can work, speak, and act in the Father’s stead. He is no mere man. He is the Word of God dwelling in human flesh. His voice is the voice of the Father, and his life is the life of God made visible in human form. The use of the expression “<span>I Am<\/span>” is thus a striking and powerful way to express who Jesus is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 6:35, 48; 8:12, 58; 9:510:7-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1, 5<\/p>","summary_ro":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as egō eimi). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (egō) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identit...","summary_en":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as egō eimi). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (egō) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88231,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93451,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93507,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","title_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","summary_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93613,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus","title_en":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3> “<span>I Am<\/span>” Sayings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identity of the speaker. As an example from another Gospel, Jesus says in the Sermon on the Mount, “You have heard that it was said . . . but <em>I <\/em>[<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>] say” (see Matt 5:22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44, etc.). The inclusion of the personal pronoun sharpens the contrast between Jesus’ instruction and that of Moses. This remarkable phrase underscores the authority of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>At other times, Jesus’ use of “I am” is grammatically odd, occurring without a predicate. For example, “Before Abraham was even born, <span>I Am<\/span>” (John 8:58). <em>Before Abraham, Jesus was what?<\/em> (cp. 8:28, 59; 13:19). The best explanation of this odd expression comes from the Old Testament. When Moses met the Lord on Mount Sinai, he was eager to discover God’s name (Exod 3:6, 13-14). God tells him that his name is <span>Yhwh<\/span>, four Hebrew letters that express existence. When the Old Testament was later translated into Greek, this name for God was translated as “<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>”—emphatic “<span>I Am<\/span>.” The Greek Old Testament continued to use this title (see Isa 43:25; 51:12; 52:6). Any Jewish reader who knew the Old Testament would understand what Jesus meant when he employed the divine “<span>I Am<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus not only represents God. The “<span>I Am<\/span>” statements demonstrate Jesus’ divine status and showing that he can work, speak, and act in the Father’s stead. He is no mere man. He is the Word of God dwelling in human flesh. His voice is the voice of the Father, and his life is the life of God made visible in human form. The use of the expression “<span>I Am<\/span>” is thus a striking and powerful way to express who Jesus is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 6:35, 48; 8:12, 58; 9:510:7-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1, 5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3> “<span>I Am<\/span>” Sayings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identity of the speaker. As an example from another Gospel, Jesus says in the Sermon on the Mount, “You have heard that it was said . . . but <em>I <\/em>[<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>] say” (see Matt 5:22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44, etc.). The inclusion of the personal pronoun sharpens the contrast between Jesus’ instruction and that of Moses. This remarkable phrase underscores the authority of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>At other times, Jesus’ use of “I am” is grammatically odd, occurring without a predicate. For example, “Before Abraham was even born, <span>I Am<\/span>” (John 8:58). <em>Before Abraham, Jesus was what?<\/em> (cp. 8:28, 59; 13:19). The best explanation of this odd expression comes from the Old Testament. When Moses met the Lord on Mount Sinai, he was eager to discover God’s name (Exod 3:6, 13-14). God tells him that his name is <span>Yhwh<\/span>, four Hebrew letters that express existence. When the Old Testament was later translated into Greek, this name for God was translated as “<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>”—emphatic “<span>I Am<\/span>.” The Greek Old Testament continued to use this title (see Isa 43:25; 51:12; 52:6). Any Jewish reader who knew the Old Testament would understand what Jesus meant when he employed the divine “<span>I Am<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus not only represents God. The “<span>I Am<\/span>” statements demonstrate Jesus’ divine status and showing that he can work, speak, and act in the Father’s stead. He is no mere man. He is the Word of God dwelling in human flesh. His voice is the voice of the Father, and his life is the life of God made visible in human form. The use of the expression “<span>I Am<\/span>” is thus a striking and powerful way to express who Jesus is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 6:35, 48; 8:12, 58; 9:510:7-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1, 5<\/p>","summary_ro":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as egō eimi). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (egō) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identit...","summary_en":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as egō eimi). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (egō) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115857,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121077,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121133,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","title_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","summary_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121239,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus","title_en":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3> “<span>I Am<\/span>” Sayings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identity of the speaker. As an example from another Gospel, Jesus says in the Sermon on the Mount, “You have heard that it was said . . . but <em>I <\/em>[<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>] say” (see Matt 5:22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44, etc.). The inclusion of the personal pronoun sharpens the contrast between Jesus’ instruction and that of Moses. This remarkable phrase underscores the authority of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>At other times, Jesus’ use of “I am” is grammatically odd, occurring without a predicate. For example, “Before Abraham was even born, <span>I Am<\/span>” (John 8:58). <em>Before Abraham, Jesus was what?<\/em> (cp. 8:28, 59; 13:19). The best explanation of this odd expression comes from the Old Testament. When Moses met the Lord on Mount Sinai, he was eager to discover God’s name (Exod 3:6, 13-14). God tells him that his name is <span>Yhwh<\/span>, four Hebrew letters that express existence. When the Old Testament was later translated into Greek, this name for God was translated as “<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>”—emphatic “<span>I Am<\/span>.” The Greek Old Testament continued to use this title (see Isa 43:25; 51:12; 52:6). Any Jewish reader who knew the Old Testament would understand what Jesus meant when he employed the divine “<span>I Am<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus not only represents God. The “<span>I Am<\/span>” statements demonstrate Jesus’ divine status and showing that he can work, speak, and act in the Father’s stead. He is no mere man. He is the Word of God dwelling in human flesh. His voice is the voice of the Father, and his life is the life of God made visible in human form. The use of the expression “<span>I Am<\/span>” is thus a striking and powerful way to express who Jesus is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 6:35, 48; 8:12, 58; 9:510:7-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1, 5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3> “<span>I Am<\/span>” Sayings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identity of the speaker. As an example from another Gospel, Jesus says in the Sermon on the Mount, “You have heard that it was said . . . but <em>I <\/em>[<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>] say” (see Matt 5:22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44, etc.). The inclusion of the personal pronoun sharpens the contrast between Jesus’ instruction and that of Moses. This remarkable phrase underscores the authority of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>At other times, Jesus’ use of “I am” is grammatically odd, occurring without a predicate. For example, “Before Abraham was even born, <span>I Am<\/span>” (John 8:58). <em>Before Abraham, Jesus was what?<\/em> (cp. 8:28, 59; 13:19). The best explanation of this odd expression comes from the Old Testament. When Moses met the Lord on Mount Sinai, he was eager to discover God’s name (Exod 3:6, 13-14). God tells him that his name is <span>Yhwh<\/span>, four Hebrew letters that express existence. When the Old Testament was later translated into Greek, this name for God was translated as “<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>”—emphatic “<span>I Am<\/span>.” The Greek Old Testament continued to use this title (see Isa 43:25; 51:12; 52:6). Any Jewish reader who knew the Old Testament would understand what Jesus meant when he employed the divine “<span>I Am<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus not only represents God. The “<span>I Am<\/span>” statements demonstrate Jesus’ divine status and showing that he can work, speak, and act in the Father’s stead. He is no mere man. He is the Word of God dwelling in human flesh. His voice is the voice of the Father, and his life is the life of God made visible in human form. The use of the expression “<span>I Am<\/span>” is thus a striking and powerful way to express who Jesus is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 6:35, 48; 8:12, 58; 9:510:7-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1, 5<\/p>","summary_ro":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as egō eimi). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (egō) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identit...","summary_en":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as egō eimi). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (egō) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143483,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148703,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148759,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","title_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>“Belief” in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun <em>faith<\/em> that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb <em>believe<\/em> to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the verb translated “believe” is often followed by the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eis<\/span> (“into”). No parallel exists for this combination in ancient Greek usage. For John, faith is not a status, but an investment in the person of Jesus. Faith means accepting who Jesus is and what he claims to be. Faith constitutes a commitment to let his call change the way we live. Faith is the work God wants from us (John 6:29), demonstrated as we abide in Jesus’ word, as we love him, and as we obey his commands (John 8:31; 15:1-17; see 1 Jn 5:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 15:6; Isa 28:16; Mark 1:15; 9:23-24; John 1:12-13; 3:10-18; 5:24; 6:35-36; 7:38; 9:35-38; 11:25-27; 12:37; 20:25-31; Acts 10:43; 13:39; Rom 1:16; 10:9-10; Heb 4:3<\/p>","summary_ro":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","summary_en":"“Belief” in the Gospel of John Believing occupies a central place in John’s Gospel. John does not use the noun faith that appears frequently elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., see Matt 8:8-10; Mark 11:22; Acts 20:21; Rom 1:17; 3:27-31; 4:3-5; Heb 11:1-39; Jas 2:14-24; 1 Pet 1:5-7). John prefers the verb believe to underscore that faith is not simply a static dogma, but is dynamic, requiring action. In John’s Gospel, “believing” in Jesus is the trait of all true disciples. In the Gospel of ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148865,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus","title_en":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3> “<span>I Am<\/span>” Sayings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identity of the speaker. As an example from another Gospel, Jesus says in the Sermon on the Mount, “You have heard that it was said . . . but <em>I <\/em>[<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>] say” (see Matt 5:22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44, etc.). The inclusion of the personal pronoun sharpens the contrast between Jesus’ instruction and that of Moses. This remarkable phrase underscores the authority of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>At other times, Jesus’ use of “I am” is grammatically odd, occurring without a predicate. For example, “Before Abraham was even born, <span>I Am<\/span>” (John 8:58). <em>Before Abraham, Jesus was what?<\/em> (cp. 8:28, 59; 13:19). The best explanation of this odd expression comes from the Old Testament. When Moses met the Lord on Mount Sinai, he was eager to discover God’s name (Exod 3:6, 13-14). God tells him that his name is <span>Yhwh<\/span>, four Hebrew letters that express existence. When the Old Testament was later translated into Greek, this name for God was translated as “<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>”—emphatic “<span>I Am<\/span>.” The Greek Old Testament continued to use this title (see Isa 43:25; 51:12; 52:6). Any Jewish reader who knew the Old Testament would understand what Jesus meant when he employed the divine “<span>I Am<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus not only represents God. The “<span>I Am<\/span>” statements demonstrate Jesus’ divine status and showing that he can work, speak, and act in the Father’s stead. He is no mere man. He is the Word of God dwelling in human flesh. His voice is the voice of the Father, and his life is the life of God made visible in human form. The use of the expression “<span>I Am<\/span>” is thus a striking and powerful way to express who Jesus is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 6:35, 48; 8:12, 58; 9:510:7-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1, 5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3> “<span>I Am<\/span>” Sayings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identity of the speaker. As an example from another Gospel, Jesus says in the Sermon on the Mount, “You have heard that it was said . . . but <em>I <\/em>[<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>] say” (see Matt 5:22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44, etc.). The inclusion of the personal pronoun sharpens the contrast between Jesus’ instruction and that of Moses. This remarkable phrase underscores the authority of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>At other times, Jesus’ use of “I am” is grammatically odd, occurring without a predicate. For example, “Before Abraham was even born, <span>I Am<\/span>” (John 8:58). <em>Before Abraham, Jesus was what?<\/em> (cp. 8:28, 59; 13:19). The best explanation of this odd expression comes from the Old Testament. When Moses met the Lord on Mount Sinai, he was eager to discover God’s name (Exod 3:6, 13-14). God tells him that his name is <span>Yhwh<\/span>, four Hebrew letters that express existence. When the Old Testament was later translated into Greek, this name for God was translated as “<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>”—emphatic “<span>I Am<\/span>.” The Greek Old Testament continued to use this title (see Isa 43:25; 51:12; 52:6). Any Jewish reader who knew the Old Testament would understand what Jesus meant when he employed the divine “<span>I Am<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus not only represents God. The “<span>I Am<\/span>” statements demonstrate Jesus’ divine status and showing that he can work, speak, and act in the Father’s stead. He is no mere man. He is the Word of God dwelling in human flesh. His voice is the voice of the Father, and his life is the life of God made visible in human form. The use of the expression “<span>I Am<\/span>” is thus a striking and powerful way to express who Jesus is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 6:35, 48; 8:12, 58; 9:510:7-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1, 5<\/p>","summary_ro":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as egō eimi). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (egō) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identit...","summary_en":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as egō eimi). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (egō) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"37":[{"id":20196,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of John","title_en":"Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","summary_en":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":40030,"type":"textbox","type_label":"Notă explicativă","type_icon":"💡","type_color":"#8b5cf6","title_ro":"Difficulties in Prayer","title_en":"Difficulties in Prayer","content_ro":"<h3>Difficulties in Prayer<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>Why does God answer some prayers and not others?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>In attempting to answer this question it is necessary to bear in mind that prayer is not to be thought of in mechanical terms. Prayer involves a personal relationship with God. So the reason why God answers one prayer and not another has nothing to do with the volume or length of the prayers themselves. Because prayer involves a personal relationship with God, sincerity and unaffectedness in that relationship are of paramount importance. There must be no hypocrisy or mere formalism in prayer. Length of prayer may be an indication of strength of desire, or it may not. Scripture contains examples of both long and short prayers.<\/p>\n<p>Assuming sincerity, the most fundamental factor is the relationship between the one who prays and the express will of God. The only warrant for praying at all is that God commands it and desires it, and the only warrant for praying for some particular thing rather than for some other thing is that God wills it or may will it. A knowledge of the will of God as it is revealed in Scripture is basic to a proper understanding of petitionary prayer and to proper conduct in prayer.<\/p>\n<p>It is necessary to distinguish between those matters that God has declared he will unfailingly grant upon true prayer being made and those matters that he may grant upon true prayer being made. The guide for prayer is not the petitioner’s own needs, either real or imaginary, nor his feelings or state of mind when he prays, nor his or others’ speculations about the future. The guide is Scripture alone. And the Scriptures distinguish between (1) those things a person may pray for that are desirable or good in themselves, and yet that are not for every believer’s highest good, and (2) those things that concern redemption. For instance, health or wealth, or a particular career, though each is desirable and lawful, may nevertheless not be best, in the wisdom of God, for a particular individual at a particular time. Paul’s “thorn in the flesh” (2 Cor 12:7-9) and the death of the child of David and Bathsheba (2 Sm 12:15-23) are examples of unanswered prayer. So although health or wealth may be sincerely and warrantably prayed for, God in his wisdom and sovereignty may decline to grant these things—because these things may not be included in that particular array of things that are working together for the good of the believer concerned (Rom 8:28).<\/p>\n<p>By contrast, the blessings of redemption—such as forgiveness of sins, sanctification, and strength and wisdom for the fulfilling of duties—are always given to those who truly pray for them (Ps 84:11; Lk 11:13; Jn 6:37; 1 Thes 4:3; Jas 1:5). Even such unqualified or unconditional blessings may come after apparent delay, or from an unexpected source, and allowance for factors such as these must be made when judging whether or not prayer has been answered. An important part of petitioning God is the discipline of conforming one’s desires to the revealed will and the ongoing providence of God. In this sense prayer is educative for the believer. “Not my will but thine be done” is the concern of the sincere petitioner. The exercise of faith in prayer to God is seen in submission to the express will of God. Otherwise, faith becomes presumption, and humility becomes arrogance.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Difficulties in Prayer<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>Why does God answer some prayers and not others?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>In attempting to answer this question it is necessary to bear in mind that prayer is not to be thought of in mechanical terms. Prayer involves a personal relationship with God. So the reason why God answers one prayer and not another has nothing to do with the volume or length of the prayers themselves. Because prayer involves a personal relationship with God, sincerity and unaffectedness in that relationship are of paramount importance. There must be no hypocrisy or mere formalism in prayer. Length of prayer may be an indication of strength of desire, or it may not. Scripture contains examples of both long and short prayers.<\/p>\n<p>Assuming sincerity, the most fundamental factor is the relationship between the one who prays and the express will of God. The only warrant for praying at all is that God commands it and desires it, and the only warrant for praying for some particular thing rather than for some other thing is that God wills it or may will it. A knowledge of the will of God as it is revealed in Scripture is basic to a proper understanding of petitionary prayer and to proper conduct in prayer.<\/p>\n<p>It is necessary to distinguish between those matters that God has declared he will unfailingly grant upon true prayer being made and those matters that he may grant upon true prayer being made. The guide for prayer is not the petitioner’s own needs, either real or imaginary, nor his feelings or state of mind when he prays, nor his or others’ speculations about the future. The guide is Scripture alone. And the Scriptures distinguish between (1) those things a person may pray for that are desirable or good in themselves, and yet that are not for every believer’s highest good, and (2) those things that concern redemption. For instance, health or wealth, or a particular career, though each is desirable and lawful, may nevertheless not be best, in the wisdom of God, for a particular individual at a particular time. Paul’s “thorn in the flesh” (2 Cor 12:7-9) and the death of the child of David and Bathsheba (2 Sm 12:15-23) are examples of unanswered prayer. So although health or wealth may be sincerely and warrantably prayed for, God in his wisdom and sovereignty may decline to grant these things—because these things may not be included in that particular array of things that are working together for the good of the believer concerned (Rom 8:28).<\/p>\n<p>By contrast, the blessings of redemption—such as forgiveness of sins, sanctification, and strength and wisdom for the fulfilling of duties—are always given to those who truly pray for them (Ps 84:11; Lk 11:13; Jn 6:37; 1 Thes 4:3; Jas 1:5). Even such unqualified or unconditional blessings may come after apparent delay, or from an unexpected source, and allowance for factors such as these must be made when judging whether or not prayer has been answered. An important part of petitioning God is the discipline of conforming one’s desires to the revealed will and the ongoing providence of God. In this sense prayer is educative for the believer. “Not my will but thine be done” is the concern of the sincere petitioner. The exercise of faith in prayer to God is seen in submission to the express will of God. Otherwise, faith becomes presumption, and humility becomes arrogance.<\/p>","summary_ro":"Difficulties in Prayer Why does God answer some prayers and not others? In attempting to answer this question it is necessary to bear in mind that prayer is not to be thought of in mechanical terms. Prayer involves a personal relationship with God. So the reason why God answers one prayer and not another has nothing to do with the volume or length of the prayers themselves. Because prayer involves a personal relationship with God, sincerity and unaffectedness in that relationship are of param...","summary_en":"Difficulties in Prayer Why does God answer some prayers and not others? In attempting to answer this question it is necessary to bear in mind that prayer is not to be thought of in mechanical terms. Prayer involves a personal relationship with God. So the reason why God answers one prayer and not another has nothing to do with the volume or length of the prayers themselves. Because prayer involves a personal relationship with God, sincerity and unaffectedness in that relationship are of param...","source":"Textboxes\/Textboxes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":40059,"type":"textbox","type_label":"Notă explicativă","type_icon":"💡","type_color":"#8b5cf6","title_ro":"God’s Sovereignty and Our Assurance","title_en":"God’s Sovereignty and Our Assurance","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Sovereignty and Our Assurance<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>A proper understanding of God’s sovereignty should encourage repentant sinners and faltering believers to call upon God for salvation and to walk secure in his love. Jesus said, “All that the Father gives me will come to me; and him who comes to me I will not cast out” (Jn 6:37, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Because God has planned and purposed our salvation, we may have assurance that he will accept and forgive those who trust him (Jn 3:16). Christ’s sheep hear his voice and follow him; they will never perish or be snatched out of his hand (Jn 10:29).<\/p>\n<p>Such an attitude of trust in God removes the presumptive pride of the person who trusts his own good works for salvation (Mt 7:21-23; 1 Cor 10:12; Heb 3:12), or the agonizing doubt of the believer who is sensitive to his own sinfulness. Because salvation is by grace (Eph 2:8), the doubting believer may claim the finished and sufficient work of Christ and thus rest secure that God will finish his work in each believer (Phil 1:6).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Sovereignty and Our Assurance<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>A proper understanding of God’s sovereignty should encourage repentant sinners and faltering believers to call upon God for salvation and to walk secure in his love. Jesus said, “All that the Father gives me will come to me; and him who comes to me I will not cast out” (Jn 6:37, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Because God has planned and purposed our salvation, we may have assurance that he will accept and forgive those who trust him (Jn 3:16). Christ’s sheep hear his voice and follow him; they will never perish or be snatched out of his hand (Jn 10:29).<\/p>\n<p>Such an attitude of trust in God removes the presumptive pride of the person who trusts his own good works for salvation (Mt 7:21-23; 1 Cor 10:12; Heb 3:12), or the agonizing doubt of the believer who is sensitive to his own sinfulness. Because salvation is by grace (Eph 2:8), the doubting believer may claim the finished and sufficient work of Christ and thus rest secure that God will finish his work in each believer (Phil 1:6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Sovereignty and Our Assurance A proper understanding of God’s sovereignty should encourage repentant sinners and faltering believers to call upon God for salvation and to walk secure in his love. Jesus said, “All that the Father gives me will come to me; and him who comes to me I will not cast out” (Jn 6:37, rsv). Because God has planned and purposed our salvation, we may have assurance that he will accept and forgive those who trust him (Jn 3:16). Christ’s sheep hear his voice and foll...","summary_en":"God’s Sovereignty and Our Assurance A proper understanding of God’s sovereignty should encourage repentant sinners and faltering believers to call upon God for salvation and to walk secure in his love. Jesus said, “All that the Father gives me will come to me; and him who comes to me I will not cast out” (Jn 6:37, rsv). Because God has planned and purposed our salvation, we may have assurance that he will accept and forgive those who trust him (Jn 3:16). Christ’s sheep hear his voice and foll...","source":"Textboxes\/Textboxes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56445,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:37","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:37","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:37-40<\/strong> Jesus’ mission in the world is sure to succeed. God sent Jesus (6:38) and calls people to follow him (6:37, 44). Those who come to him are secure in Jesus’ promise that he will not reject them or lose them (6:39).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:37-40<\/strong> Jesus’ mission in the world is sure to succeed. God sent Jesus (6:38) and calls people to follow him (6:37, 44). Those who come to him are secure in Jesus’ promise that he will not reject them or lose them (6:39).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:37-40 Jesus’ mission in the world is sure to succeed. God sent Jesus (6:38) and calls people to follow him (6:37, 44). Those who come to him are secure in Jesus’ promise that he will not reject them or lose them (6:39).","summary_en":"6:37-40 Jesus’ mission in the world is sure to succeed. God sent Jesus (6:38) and calls people to follow him (6:37, 44). Those who come to him are secure in Jesus’ promise that he will not reject them or lose them (6:39).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56446,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:37","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:37","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:37<\/strong> <em>those the Father has given:<\/em> God moves in people’s hearts, bringing them to Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:37<\/strong> <em>those the Father has given:<\/em> God moves in people’s hearts, bringing them to Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:37 those the Father has given: God moves in people’s hearts, bringing them to Jesus.","summary_en":"6:37 those the Father has given: God moves in people’s hearts, bringing them to Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84071,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:37","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:37","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:37-40<\/strong> Jesus’ mission in the world is sure to succeed. God sent Jesus (6:38) and calls people to follow him (6:37, 44). Those who come to him are secure in Jesus’ promise that he will not reject them or lose them (6:39).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:37-40<\/strong> Jesus’ mission in the world is sure to succeed. God sent Jesus (6:38) and calls people to follow him (6:37, 44). Those who come to him are secure in Jesus’ promise that he will not reject them or lose them (6:39).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:37-40 Jesus’ mission in the world is sure to succeed. God sent Jesus (6:38) and calls people to follow him (6:37, 44). Those who come to him are secure in Jesus’ promise that he will not reject them or lose them (6:39).","summary_en":"6:37-40 Jesus’ mission in the world is sure to succeed. God sent Jesus (6:38) and calls people to follow him (6:37, 44). Those who come to him are secure in Jesus’ promise that he will not reject them or lose them (6:39).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84072,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:37","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:37","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:37<\/strong> <em>those the Father has given:<\/em> God moves in people’s hearts, bringing them to Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:37<\/strong> <em>those the Father has given:<\/em> God moves in people’s hearts, bringing them to Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:37 those the Father has given: God moves in people’s hearts, bringing them to Jesus.","summary_en":"6:37 those the Father has given: God moves in people’s hearts, bringing them to Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111697,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:37","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:37","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:37-40<\/strong> Jesus’ mission in the world is sure to succeed. God sent Jesus (6:38) and calls people to follow him (6:37, 44). Those who come to him are secure in Jesus’ promise that he will not reject them or lose them (6:39).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:37-40<\/strong> Jesus’ mission in the world is sure to succeed. God sent Jesus (6:38) and calls people to follow him (6:37, 44). Those who come to him are secure in Jesus’ promise that he will not reject them or lose them (6:39).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:37-40 Jesus’ mission in the world is sure to succeed. God sent Jesus (6:38) and calls people to follow him (6:37, 44). Those who come to him are secure in Jesus’ promise that he will not reject them or lose them (6:39).","summary_en":"6:37-40 Jesus’ mission in the world is sure to succeed. God sent Jesus (6:38) and calls people to follow him (6:37, 44). Those who come to him are secure in Jesus’ promise that he will not reject them or lose them (6:39).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111698,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:37","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:37","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:37<\/strong> <em>those the Father has given:<\/em> God moves in people’s hearts, bringing them to Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:37<\/strong> <em>those the Father has given:<\/em> God moves in people’s hearts, bringing them to Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:37 those the Father has given: God moves in people’s hearts, bringing them to Jesus.","summary_en":"6:37 those the Father has given: God moves in people’s hearts, bringing them to Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139323,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:37","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:37","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:37-40<\/strong> Jesus’ mission in the world is sure to succeed. God sent Jesus (6:38) and calls people to follow him (6:37, 44). Those who come to him are secure in Jesus’ promise that he will not reject them or lose them (6:39).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:37-40<\/strong> Jesus’ mission in the world is sure to succeed. God sent Jesus (6:38) and calls people to follow him (6:37, 44). Those who come to him are secure in Jesus’ promise that he will not reject them or lose them (6:39).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:37-40 Jesus’ mission in the world is sure to succeed. God sent Jesus (6:38) and calls people to follow him (6:37, 44). Those who come to him are secure in Jesus’ promise that he will not reject them or lose them (6:39).","summary_en":"6:37-40 Jesus’ mission in the world is sure to succeed. God sent Jesus (6:38) and calls people to follow him (6:37, 44). Those who come to him are secure in Jesus’ promise that he will not reject them or lose them (6:39).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139324,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:37","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:37","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:37<\/strong> <em>those the Father has given:<\/em> God moves in people’s hearts, bringing them to Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:37<\/strong> <em>those the Father has given:<\/em> God moves in people’s hearts, bringing them to Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:37 those the Father has given: God moves in people’s hearts, bringing them to Jesus.","summary_en":"6:37 those the Father has given: God moves in people’s hearts, bringing them to Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"38":[{"id":16961,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Humility","title_en":"Humility","content_ro":"<h3>HUMILITY<\/h3>\n<p>A condition of lowliness or affliction in which one experiences a loss of power and prestige. Outside of biblical faith, humility in this sense would not usually be considered a virtue. Within the context of the Judeo-Christian tradition, however, humility is considered the proper attitude of human beings toward their Creator. Humility is a grateful and spontaneous awareness that life is a gift, and it is manifested as an ungrudging and unhypocritical acknowledgment of absolute dependence upon God.<\/p>\n<p>In biblical literature there is not a clear distinction between humility and meekness or patience. In early stages of Israel’s history, the humble were identified as the poor, the afflicted, and the powerless. The Lord delivers the humble but brings down the proud (1 Sm 2:7; 2 Sm 22:28). Before the power and glory of God, the patriarch Abraham confessed that he was but dust and ashes (Gn 18:27). Israel began as a nation subjected to slavery and knew themselves as a people chosen not because of numerical strength or material wealth but because of God’s love (Dt 7:7-8). By attributing the source of all wealth and power to the Lord, those two major sources of human pride and arrogance are brought under control (cf. Jer 9:23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The humble poor are the constant concern of the Lord (Ex 23:6, 11; Dt 15:4, 7). Consequently, the humility of the poor became the symbol of the righteous God-fearer (Nm 12:3). In the development of the concept of humility in the OT, humility is nearly equated with righteousness and is identified, along with justice and mercy, as the requirement of God (Mi 6:8). In the Psalms particularly, “the afflicted” is almost a technical term for the righteous (Pss 22:26; 25:9; 147:6).<\/p>\n<p>In addition, humility is the appropriate response of the sinner in the presence of the holiness of God. The prophet Isaiah, confronted by the glory of God in the temple, cried, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man” (Is 6:5). Thus humility became more of a character trait than a term that reflected a state of material poverty or affliction. It became a concept reflective of the essence of piety and godliness expected of all people who have God as their Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Only rarely in the NT does humility refer to an objective condition of poverty, affliction, or oppression.The humility motif is developed in connection with Jesus as Messiah. The religious ideal of humility that the OT attributed to the coming King certainly applied to Jesus (Zec 9:9; cf. Mt 21:4-5). As Son of God, Jesus took no thought for himself but lived a life of obedience and trust in God the Father. The apostle Paul attributed to the incarnate Son of God a self-emptying by which he “humbled himself” and took on the form of a servant (Phil 2:5-8). Jesus’ character exhibited no pride or arrogance.<\/p>\n<p>Though bold in the face of hypocrisy and unflinching in his repudiation of pretentious religion, Jesus was “gentle and humble in heart” (Mt 11:29). He could, therefore, issue a severe warning against desire for status and openly rebuke the Pharisees for their violence against the poor and oppressed (Lk 14:11; Mt 23:12). At the same time, he was humble before those whose servant and helper he had become (Lk 22:27; Mk 10:45; Mt 20:28). The highest dignity of Jesus and his willingness to accept the cross in submission to the Father’s will are one. So his teaching on poverty of spirit rang true as a testimony of his own life. He ascribed all glory to his Father and lived in total dependence upon him (Jn 5:19; 6:38; 7:15; 8:28, 50; 14:10, 24). By washing his disciples’ feet, he assumed the role of servant with no loss of dignity or self-worth. And he set forth such service as a model of a life that finds happiness in preferring others over one’s self (Jn 13:1-20; Phil 2:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, disciples of Jesus are also summoned to a life of humility. Turning their backs on status, security, and success, Christians seek an opportunity to gain themselves in serving others. Humility, thus, is the all-embracing life principle by which love seeks the good of others, and thus fulfills the law (cf. Rom 12:10; 13:8-10).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HUMILITY<\/h3>\n<p>A condition of lowliness or affliction in which one experiences a loss of power and prestige. Outside of biblical faith, humility in this sense would not usually be considered a virtue. Within the context of the Judeo-Christian tradition, however, humility is considered the proper attitude of human beings toward their Creator. Humility is a grateful and spontaneous awareness that life is a gift, and it is manifested as an ungrudging and unhypocritical acknowledgment of absolute dependence upon God.<\/p>\n<p>In biblical literature there is not a clear distinction between humility and meekness or patience. In early stages of Israel’s history, the humble were identified as the poor, the afflicted, and the powerless. The Lord delivers the humble but brings down the proud (1 Sm 2:7; 2 Sm 22:28). Before the power and glory of God, the patriarch Abraham confessed that he was but dust and ashes (Gn 18:27). Israel began as a nation subjected to slavery and knew themselves as a people chosen not because of numerical strength or material wealth but because of God’s love (Dt 7:7-8). By attributing the source of all wealth and power to the Lord, those two major sources of human pride and arrogance are brought under control (cf. Jer 9:23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The humble poor are the constant concern of the Lord (Ex 23:6, 11; Dt 15:4, 7). Consequently, the humility of the poor became the symbol of the righteous God-fearer (Nm 12:3). In the development of the concept of humility in the OT, humility is nearly equated with righteousness and is identified, along with justice and mercy, as the requirement of God (Mi 6:8). In the Psalms particularly, “the afflicted” is almost a technical term for the righteous (Pss 22:26; 25:9; 147:6).<\/p>\n<p>In addition, humility is the appropriate response of the sinner in the presence of the holiness of God. The prophet Isaiah, confronted by the glory of God in the temple, cried, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man” (Is 6:5). Thus humility became more of a character trait than a term that reflected a state of material poverty or affliction. It became a concept reflective of the essence of piety and godliness expected of all people who have God as their Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Only rarely in the NT does humility refer to an objective condition of poverty, affliction, or oppression.The humility motif is developed in connection with Jesus as Messiah. The religious ideal of humility that the OT attributed to the coming King certainly applied to Jesus (Zec 9:9; cf. Mt 21:4-5). As Son of God, Jesus took no thought for himself but lived a life of obedience and trust in God the Father. The apostle Paul attributed to the incarnate Son of God a self-emptying by which he “humbled himself” and took on the form of a servant (Phil 2:5-8). Jesus’ character exhibited no pride or arrogance.<\/p>\n<p>Though bold in the face of hypocrisy and unflinching in his repudiation of pretentious religion, Jesus was “gentle and humble in heart” (Mt 11:29). He could, therefore, issue a severe warning against desire for status and openly rebuke the Pharisees for their violence against the poor and oppressed (Lk 14:11; Mt 23:12). At the same time, he was humble before those whose servant and helper he had become (Lk 22:27; Mk 10:45; Mt 20:28). The highest dignity of Jesus and his willingness to accept the cross in submission to the Father’s will are one. So his teaching on poverty of spirit rang true as a testimony of his own life. He ascribed all glory to his Father and lived in total dependence upon him (Jn 5:19; 6:38; 7:15; 8:28, 50; 14:10, 24). By washing his disciples’ feet, he assumed the role of servant with no loss of dignity or self-worth. And he set forth such service as a model of a life that finds happiness in preferring others over one’s self (Jn 13:1-20; Phil 2:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, disciples of Jesus are also summoned to a life of humility. Turning their backs on status, security, and success, Christians seek an opportunity to gain themselves in serving others. Humility, thus, is the all-embracing life principle by which love seeks the good of others, and thus fulfills the law (cf. Rom 12:10; 13:8-10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"HUMILITY A condition of lowliness or affliction in which one experiences a loss of power and prestige. Outside of biblical faith, humility in this sense would not usually be considered a virtue. Within the context of the Judeo-Christian tradition, however, humility is considered the proper attitude of human beings toward their Creator. Humility is a grateful and spontaneous awareness that life is a gift, and it is manifested as an ungrudging and unhypocritical acknowledgment of absolute depen...","summary_en":"HUMILITY A condition of lowliness or affliction in which one experiences a loss of power and prestige. Outside of biblical faith, humility in this sense would not usually be considered a virtue. Within the context of the Judeo-Christian tradition, however, humility is considered the proper attitude of human beings toward their Creator. Humility is a grateful and spontaneous awareness that life is a gift, and it is manifested as an ungrudging and unhypocritical acknowledgment of absolute depen...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"39":[{"id":8831,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Day","title_en":"Day","content_ro":"<h3>DAY<\/h3>\n<p>Most literally, a period of time delimited by the earth’s rotation around its axis, such as the period between two consecutive sunrises; also, the portion of that period in which the sun is visible, the other portion being called “night.” The word “day” occurs over 2,000 times in the OT, over 350 times in the NT. The Hebrew word for “day” is used in a variety of ways, not merely in the literal sense. The Hebrew day began in the evening and continued until the following evening, a reckoning presumably based on the Torah (cf. Gn 1:14, 19). That kind of literal solar (24-hour) day is known as a civil day. Among other ancient Near Eastern nations the civil day began at different times. Greek custom agreed with that of the Hebrews; the Babylonians started their day at sunrise; the Egyptian and Roman day stretched from one midnight to the next.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BiblicalDaysandWeeks\">Biblical Days and Weeks<\/p>\n<p>Commonly recognized units of the visible (12-hour) day were morning, noonday, and evening (Ps 55:17). Those divisions were sometimes defined by terms for dawn (Jb 3:9), the heat of the day (1 Sm 11:11), noon (Gn 43:16), the cool of the day (3:8), and evening (Ru 2:17). The Hebrew phrase “between the two evenings” (Ex 12:6, <span>rsv<\/span> mg) probably referred to dusk, the dark part of twilight (Ex 16:12). Division of days into consecutive hours did not take place until the time of Christ. The closest OT approximation to such a unit was the division of the day into quarters (Neh 9:3), perhaps a counterpart of the preexilic division of the night into watches.<\/p>\n<p>The ancient Hebrews did not name the days of the week other than the Sabbath. Rather, they referred to them numerically, a practice carried over into NT times (Lk 24:1). Because of the traditional Hebrew emphasis on the Sabbath, it was important for the Jews to know the exact time when the Sabbath began. The Pharisees therefore decided that the appearance of three stars following sunset would determine the Sabbath day’s beginning.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DaysofCreation\">Days of Creation<\/p>\n<p>Many people believe that the days mentioned in the Genesis Creation narrative were 24-hour periods. The phrase “there was evening, there was morning” is used to support that idea. That expression, however, is actually a Sumerian literary figure that pairs opposites together to describe totality. Thus “evening-morning” means a complete phase of time within the total creative cycle; it emphasizes the completeness or comprehensiveness of the process, not the specific period of time in which that process was accomplished. The totality of Creation, phase by phase, may have been thus depicted without any necessary reference to a defined time period.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Sumerian civil day included only the visible (12-hour) period, a legal day of other nations was actually a “double day” (24 hours). If the early Genesis material reflects Sumerian culture, the use of “evening-morning” would preclude current concepts of a civil day and point instead to a phase or general time period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestament\">Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, “day” frequently has a figurative meaning—for example, the “day of the Lord” (Jl 1:15; Am 5:18), the “day of trouble” (Ps 20:1), and the “day of God’s wrath” (Jb 20:28). The plural form is sometimes used to describe a king’s reign (1 Kgs 10:21) or the extent of an individual’s life (Gn 5:4; 1 Kgs 3:14; Ps 90:12). God is described in the book of Daniel as the “Ancient of Days” (Dn 7:9, 13).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the Sabbath (Gn 2:3; Ex 20:8-11), which was reserved for rest and worship, “day” was applied to the Passover celebration each spring (Ex 12:14; Lv 23:5) and the Day of Atonement (Lv 16:29-31) each autumn. As with the Sabbath, no work was performed on those occasions; prescribed religious rituals were observed.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestament\">New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the use of “day” followed Semitic usage to some extent, although the four military night watches were of Greek and Roman origin. The 12-hour day of NT times was a legacy of Babylonian astronomy (cf. Jn 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the literal usage of “day,” NT authors sometimes employed it figuratively, as in such expressions as the “day of salvation” (2 Cor 6:2) and the “day of Jesus Christ” (Phil 1:6). Or they described specified periods of time, as in the “days of his Temple duties” (Lk 1:23, <span>tlb<\/span>). Special feasts mentioned include the Passover (Jn 12:1), the days of Unleavened Bread (Acts 12:3), and the Day of Pentecost (2:1).<\/p>\n<p>As in the OT, the period of human life is described as days (Jn 9:4). Christians are called “children of the light and of the day” (1 Thes 5:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). Longer periods or eras are referred to as days (2 Cor 6:2; Eph 5:16; 6:13; Heb 5:7). The ominous note struck by the Hebrew prophets about a day of judgment is matched by NT stress on a day of final divine judgment when the Son of Man (Jesus) will reveal himself as Lord (Lk 17:30; Jn 6:39-44; 1 Cor 5:5; 1 Thes 5:2; 2 Pt 2:9; 3:7, 12; 1 Jn 4:17; Rv 16:14). The “day of eternity” marks that point at which time will become eternity (2 Pt 3:18, <span>rsv<\/span>). The new Jerusalem, dwelling place of God’s people, is described as a place of perpetual day (Rv 21:25).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Day of the Lord; Eschatology.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DAY<\/h3>\n<p>Most literally, a period of time delimited by the earth’s rotation around its axis, such as the period between two consecutive sunrises; also, the portion of that period in which the sun is visible, the other portion being called “night.” The word “day” occurs over 2,000 times in the OT, over 350 times in the NT. The Hebrew word for “day” is used in a variety of ways, not merely in the literal sense. The Hebrew day began in the evening and continued until the following evening, a reckoning presumably based on the Torah (cf. Gn 1:14, 19). That kind of literal solar (24-hour) day is known as a civil day. Among other ancient Near Eastern nations the civil day began at different times. Greek custom agreed with that of the Hebrews; the Babylonians started their day at sunrise; the Egyptian and Roman day stretched from one midnight to the next.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BiblicalDaysandWeeks\">Biblical Days and Weeks<\/p>\n<p>Commonly recognized units of the visible (12-hour) day were morning, noonday, and evening (Ps 55:17). Those divisions were sometimes defined by terms for dawn (Jb 3:9), the heat of the day (1 Sm 11:11), noon (Gn 43:16), the cool of the day (3:8), and evening (Ru 2:17). The Hebrew phrase “between the two evenings” (Ex 12:6, <span>rsv<\/span> mg) probably referred to dusk, the dark part of twilight (Ex 16:12). Division of days into consecutive hours did not take place until the time of Christ. The closest OT approximation to such a unit was the division of the day into quarters (Neh 9:3), perhaps a counterpart of the preexilic division of the night into watches.<\/p>\n<p>The ancient Hebrews did not name the days of the week other than the Sabbath. Rather, they referred to them numerically, a practice carried over into NT times (Lk 24:1). Because of the traditional Hebrew emphasis on the Sabbath, it was important for the Jews to know the exact time when the Sabbath began. The Pharisees therefore decided that the appearance of three stars following sunset would determine the Sabbath day’s beginning.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DaysofCreation\">Days of Creation<\/p>\n<p>Many people believe that the days mentioned in the Genesis Creation narrative were 24-hour periods. The phrase “there was evening, there was morning” is used to support that idea. That expression, however, is actually a Sumerian literary figure that pairs opposites together to describe totality. Thus “evening-morning” means a complete phase of time within the total creative cycle; it emphasizes the completeness or comprehensiveness of the process, not the specific period of time in which that process was accomplished. The totality of Creation, phase by phase, may have been thus depicted without any necessary reference to a defined time period.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Sumerian civil day included only the visible (12-hour) period, a legal day of other nations was actually a “double day” (24 hours). If the early Genesis material reflects Sumerian culture, the use of “evening-morning” would preclude current concepts of a civil day and point instead to a phase or general time period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestament\">Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, “day” frequently has a figurative meaning—for example, the “day of the Lord” (Jl 1:15; Am 5:18), the “day of trouble” (Ps 20:1), and the “day of God’s wrath” (Jb 20:28). The plural form is sometimes used to describe a king’s reign (1 Kgs 10:21) or the extent of an individual’s life (Gn 5:4; 1 Kgs 3:14; Ps 90:12). God is described in the book of Daniel as the “Ancient of Days” (Dn 7:9, 13).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the Sabbath (Gn 2:3; Ex 20:8-11), which was reserved for rest and worship, “day” was applied to the Passover celebration each spring (Ex 12:14; Lv 23:5) and the Day of Atonement (Lv 16:29-31) each autumn. As with the Sabbath, no work was performed on those occasions; prescribed religious rituals were observed.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestament\">New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the use of “day” followed Semitic usage to some extent, although the four military night watches were of Greek and Roman origin. The 12-hour day of NT times was a legacy of Babylonian astronomy (cf. Jn 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the literal usage of “day,” NT authors sometimes employed it figuratively, as in such expressions as the “day of salvation” (2 Cor 6:2) and the “day of Jesus Christ” (Phil 1:6). Or they described specified periods of time, as in the “days of his Temple duties” (Lk 1:23, <span>tlb<\/span>). Special feasts mentioned include the Passover (Jn 12:1), the days of Unleavened Bread (Acts 12:3), and the Day of Pentecost (2:1).<\/p>\n<p>As in the OT, the period of human life is described as days (Jn 9:4). Christians are called “children of the light and of the day” (1 Thes 5:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). Longer periods or eras are referred to as days (2 Cor 6:2; Eph 5:16; 6:13; Heb 5:7). The ominous note struck by the Hebrew prophets about a day of judgment is matched by NT stress on a day of final divine judgment when the Son of Man (Jesus) will reveal himself as Lord (Lk 17:30; Jn 6:39-44; 1 Cor 5:5; 1 Thes 5:2; 2 Pt 2:9; 3:7, 12; 1 Jn 4:17; Rv 16:14). The “day of eternity” marks that point at which time will become eternity (2 Pt 3:18, <span>rsv<\/span>). The new Jerusalem, dwelling place of God’s people, is described as a place of perpetual day (Rv 21:25).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Calendars, Ancient and Modern; Day of the Lord; Eschatology.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DAY Most literally, a period of time delimited by the earth’s rotation around its axis, such as the period between two consecutive sunrises; also, the portion of that period in which the sun is visible, the other portion being called “night.” The word “day” occurs over 2,000 times in the OT, over 350 times in the NT. The Hebrew word for “day” is used in a variety of ways, not merely in the literal sense. The Hebrew day began in the evening and continued until the following evening, a reckonin...","summary_en":"DAY Most literally, a period of time delimited by the earth’s rotation around its axis, such as the period between two consecutive sunrises; also, the portion of that period in which the sun is visible, the other portion being called “night.” The word “day” occurs over 2,000 times in the OT, over 350 times in the NT. The Hebrew word for “day” is used in a variety of ways, not merely in the literal sense. The Hebrew day began in the evening and continued until the following evening, a reckonin...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22584,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Last Days","title_en":"Last Days","content_ro":"<h3>LAST DAYS<\/h3>\n<p>Expression used in Scripture to describe the final period of the world as we now know it. In the OT the last days are anticipated as the age of messianic fulfillment (see Is 2:2; Mi 4:1), and the NT writers regard themselves as living in the last days, the era of the gospel. Thus, for example, Peter explains that the events of the Day of Pentecost are the fulfillment of Joel 2:28: “In the last days, God said, I will pour out my Spirit upon all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, and your old men will dream dreams. In those days I will pour out my Spirit upon all my servants, men and women alike, and they will prophesy” (Acts 2:17-18, <span>nlt<\/span>). The author of the letter to the Hebrews declares, “Long ago God spoke many times and in many ways to our ancestors through the prophets. But now in these final days, he has spoken to us through his Son” (Heb 1:1-2, <span>nlt<\/span>). The last days, then, are the days of evangelical blessing in which the benefits of the salvation procured by the perfect life, death, resurrection, and glorification of Jesus Christ are freely available throughout the world. They are the days of opportunity for unbelievers to repent and turn to God, and of responsibility for believers to proclaim the gospel message throughout the world.<\/p>\n<p>The plural “last days” gives the impression of a period of some duration, and the correctness of this impression is confirmed by the fact that this final age has already lasted for many centuries. But in the perspective of eternity it is no more than a short time, and in every generation the end of this final age is always imminent, so much so that John speaks of it as “the last hour.” To this the presence of antichrist even within the church of the apostolic period bears witness. “It is the last hour,” John says, “and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come; therefore we know that it is the last hour” (1 Jn 2:18, <span>rsv<\/span>). The end of these last days is always at hand, and one day it will certainly come; hence the need, insisted on by Christ, for constant vigilance, in view of the consideration that we know neither the day nor the hour of his return in majesty, the climactic event that will bring these last days to a close (Mt 24:44; 25:13).<\/p>\n<p>This leads naturally to the further teaching that these last days will have their culmination in “the Day”: the last days will be terminated by the last day. The use of the term “day” in the singular corresponds in the NT to the concept of the “Day of the Lord” familiar in the OT, where it is generally presented as an awful day of final judgment against the unrepentant, but with the implication that it is also the day of the salvation and vindication of God’s people (see, e.g., Is 2:12-22; Ez 13:5; Jl 1:15; 2:1, 11; Am 5:18-24; Zep 1:7, 14). The climax of these last days, and therefore of all history, will be “the day of the Lord,” which will overtake the world suddenly (1 Thes 5:2). This last of the last days will be the day of the last judgment for rejecters of the gospel, the purification of our present fallen world, the restoration of the created order, so that in the new heaven and the new earth all of God’s purposes in creation are brought to fulfillment. Then, at the consummation of our redemption, at last fully conformed to our Redeemer’s likeness, we will enter into the enjoyment of his eternal glory (Rom 8:19-25; 1 Jn 3:2; Rv 21:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Moreover, Christians are reminded by the apostle Paul that on this last day, which he calls simply “the Day,” the quality of their building will be revealed—i.e., what they have done with their lives will be known. It is not that the security of their salvation in Christ is in any way at stake; rather, it is to measure whether they will meet him with confidence or with shame at his coming (cf. 1 Jn 2:28). “Each man’s work will become manifest,” Paul writes; “for the Day will disclose it. . . . If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved” (1 Cor 3:13-15, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>This last of the last days is followed by the everlasting day of Christ’s kingdom when God will be all in all (1 Cor 15:28; Phil 3:20-21). The last day is also, accordingly, the day of triumph and resurrection, when Christ has promised to raise up everyone who believes in him (Jn 6:39-44, 54). The last days are like night compared with the glory that will be revealed at Christ’s return, so that the end of these last days will also be the beginning of God’s unending day (see Rom 13:11-12). The realization that we are in the last days and that the last day is approaching ought to have a dramatic effect on the quality and intensity of our living here and now (see 2 Pt 3:11-14).<\/p>\n<p>The last days, then, are the days of the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. They are preliminary to and preparatory for the last day of final judgment of unbelievers and the dawn of eternal glory for believers. For Christ’s faithful followers they are days of joy and blessing, but still days in which the fullness of redemption is awaited. They are days, too, of trial and affliction for the church of Christ. But God has given us the assurance of his Spirit in our hearts, the foretaste that guarantees the full banquet hereafter, the down payment that pledges the payment in full (Rom 8:23; 2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:14). Meanwhile, we should be assured with the apostle Paul that the sufferings of these last days are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us (Rom 8:18). They are days, moreover, of responsibility and opportunity: responsibility because Christians are under orders to proclaim the gospel throughout the world (Mt 28:19-20; Acts 1:8) and all people everywhere are commanded by God to repent (Acts 17:30).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Day of the Lord; Second Coming of Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAST DAYS<\/h3>\n<p>Expression used in Scripture to describe the final period of the world as we now know it. In the OT the last days are anticipated as the age of messianic fulfillment (see Is 2:2; Mi 4:1), and the NT writers regard themselves as living in the last days, the era of the gospel. Thus, for example, Peter explains that the events of the Day of Pentecost are the fulfillment of Joel 2:28: “In the last days, God said, I will pour out my Spirit upon all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, and your old men will dream dreams. In those days I will pour out my Spirit upon all my servants, men and women alike, and they will prophesy” (Acts 2:17-18, <span>nlt<\/span>). The author of the letter to the Hebrews declares, “Long ago God spoke many times and in many ways to our ancestors through the prophets. But now in these final days, he has spoken to us through his Son” (Heb 1:1-2, <span>nlt<\/span>). The last days, then, are the days of evangelical blessing in which the benefits of the salvation procured by the perfect life, death, resurrection, and glorification of Jesus Christ are freely available throughout the world. They are the days of opportunity for unbelievers to repent and turn to God, and of responsibility for believers to proclaim the gospel message throughout the world.<\/p>\n<p>The plural “last days” gives the impression of a period of some duration, and the correctness of this impression is confirmed by the fact that this final age has already lasted for many centuries. But in the perspective of eternity it is no more than a short time, and in every generation the end of this final age is always imminent, so much so that John speaks of it as “the last hour.” To this the presence of antichrist even within the church of the apostolic period bears witness. “It is the last hour,” John says, “and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come; therefore we know that it is the last hour” (1 Jn 2:18, <span>rsv<\/span>). The end of these last days is always at hand, and one day it will certainly come; hence the need, insisted on by Christ, for constant vigilance, in view of the consideration that we know neither the day nor the hour of his return in majesty, the climactic event that will bring these last days to a close (Mt 24:44; 25:13).<\/p>\n<p>This leads naturally to the further teaching that these last days will have their culmination in “the Day”: the last days will be terminated by the last day. The use of the term “day” in the singular corresponds in the NT to the concept of the “Day of the Lord” familiar in the OT, where it is generally presented as an awful day of final judgment against the unrepentant, but with the implication that it is also the day of the salvation and vindication of God’s people (see, e.g., Is 2:12-22; Ez 13:5; Jl 1:15; 2:1, 11; Am 5:18-24; Zep 1:7, 14). The climax of these last days, and therefore of all history, will be “the day of the Lord,” which will overtake the world suddenly (1 Thes 5:2). This last of the last days will be the day of the last judgment for rejecters of the gospel, the purification of our present fallen world, the restoration of the created order, so that in the new heaven and the new earth all of God’s purposes in creation are brought to fulfillment. Then, at the consummation of our redemption, at last fully conformed to our Redeemer’s likeness, we will enter into the enjoyment of his eternal glory (Rom 8:19-25; 1 Jn 3:2; Rv 21:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Moreover, Christians are reminded by the apostle Paul that on this last day, which he calls simply “the Day,” the quality of their building will be revealed—i.e., what they have done with their lives will be known. It is not that the security of their salvation in Christ is in any way at stake; rather, it is to measure whether they will meet him with confidence or with shame at his coming (cf. 1 Jn 2:28). “Each man’s work will become manifest,” Paul writes; “for the Day will disclose it. . . . If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved” (1 Cor 3:13-15, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>This last of the last days is followed by the everlasting day of Christ’s kingdom when God will be all in all (1 Cor 15:28; Phil 3:20-21). The last day is also, accordingly, the day of triumph and resurrection, when Christ has promised to raise up everyone who believes in him (Jn 6:39-44, 54). The last days are like night compared with the glory that will be revealed at Christ’s return, so that the end of these last days will also be the beginning of God’s unending day (see Rom 13:11-12). The realization that we are in the last days and that the last day is approaching ought to have a dramatic effect on the quality and intensity of our living here and now (see 2 Pt 3:11-14).<\/p>\n<p>The last days, then, are the days of the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. They are preliminary to and preparatory for the last day of final judgment of unbelievers and the dawn of eternal glory for believers. For Christ’s faithful followers they are days of joy and blessing, but still days in which the fullness of redemption is awaited. They are days, too, of trial and affliction for the church of Christ. But God has given us the assurance of his Spirit in our hearts, the foretaste that guarantees the full banquet hereafter, the down payment that pledges the payment in full (Rom 8:23; 2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:14). Meanwhile, we should be assured with the apostle Paul that the sufferings of these last days are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us (Rom 8:18). They are days, moreover, of responsibility and opportunity: responsibility because Christians are under orders to proclaim the gospel throughout the world (Mt 28:19-20; Acts 1:8) and all people everywhere are commanded by God to repent (Acts 17:30).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Day of the Lord; Second Coming of Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAST DAYS Expression used in Scripture to describe the final period of the world as we now know it. In the OT the last days are anticipated as the age of messianic fulfillment (see Is 2:2; Mi 4:1), and the NT writers regard themselves as living in the last days, the era of the gospel. Thus, for example, Peter explains that the events of the Day of Pentecost are the fulfillment of Joel 2:28: “In the last days, God said, I will pour out my Spirit upon all people. Your sons and daughters will pr...","summary_en":"LAST DAYS Expression used in Scripture to describe the final period of the world as we now know it. In the OT the last days are anticipated as the age of messianic fulfillment (see Is 2:2; Mi 4:1), and the NT writers regard themselves as living in the last days, the era of the gospel. Thus, for example, Peter explains that the events of the Day of Pentecost are the fulfillment of Joel 2:28: “In the last days, God said, I will pour out my Spirit upon all people. Your sons and daughters will pr...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65256,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus","title_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","summary_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67095,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead","title_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","summary_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92882,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus","title_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","summary_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94721,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead","title_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","summary_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120508,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus","title_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","summary_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122347,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead","title_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","summary_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148134,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus","title_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","summary_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149973,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead","title_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","summary_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"41":[{"id":56447,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:41","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:41","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:41-42<\/strong> When Jesus identified himself as the true <em>bread . . . from heaven<\/em><em>,<\/em> the crowd faced a decision. • <em>Isn’t this . . . the son of Joseph?<\/em> They stumbled because their familiarity with Jesus made his claims seem outlandish.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:41-42<\/strong> When Jesus identified himself as the true <em>bread . . . from heaven<\/em><em>,<\/em> the crowd faced a decision. • <em>Isn’t this . . . the son of Joseph?<\/em> They stumbled because their familiarity with Jesus made his claims seem outlandish.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:41-42 When Jesus identified himself as the true bread . . . from heaven, the crowd faced a decision. • Isn’t this . . . the son of Joseph? They stumbled because their familiarity with Jesus made his claims seem outlandish.","summary_en":"6:41-42 When Jesus identified himself as the true bread . . . from heaven, the crowd faced a decision. • Isn’t this . . . the son of Joseph? They stumbled because their familiarity with Jesus made his claims seem outlandish.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84073,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:41","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:41","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:41-42<\/strong> When Jesus identified himself as the true <em>bread . . . from heaven<\/em><em>,<\/em> the crowd faced a decision. • <em>Isn’t this . . . the son of Joseph?<\/em> They stumbled because their familiarity with Jesus made his claims seem outlandish.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:41-42<\/strong> When Jesus identified himself as the true <em>bread . . . from heaven<\/em><em>,<\/em> the crowd faced a decision. • <em>Isn’t this . . . the son of Joseph?<\/em> They stumbled because their familiarity with Jesus made his claims seem outlandish.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:41-42 When Jesus identified himself as the true bread . . . from heaven, the crowd faced a decision. • Isn’t this . . . the son of Joseph? They stumbled because their familiarity with Jesus made his claims seem outlandish.","summary_en":"6:41-42 When Jesus identified himself as the true bread . . . from heaven, the crowd faced a decision. • Isn’t this . . . the son of Joseph? They stumbled because their familiarity with Jesus made his claims seem outlandish.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111699,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:41","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:41","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:41-42<\/strong> When Jesus identified himself as the true <em>bread . . . from heaven<\/em><em>,<\/em> the crowd faced a decision. • <em>Isn’t this . . . the son of Joseph?<\/em> They stumbled because their familiarity with Jesus made his claims seem outlandish.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:41-42<\/strong> When Jesus identified himself as the true <em>bread . . . from heaven<\/em><em>,<\/em> the crowd faced a decision. • <em>Isn’t this . . . the son of Joseph?<\/em> They stumbled because their familiarity with Jesus made his claims seem outlandish.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:41-42 When Jesus identified himself as the true bread . . . from heaven, the crowd faced a decision. • Isn’t this . . . the son of Joseph? They stumbled because their familiarity with Jesus made his claims seem outlandish.","summary_en":"6:41-42 When Jesus identified himself as the true bread . . . from heaven, the crowd faced a decision. • Isn’t this . . . the son of Joseph? They stumbled because their familiarity with Jesus made his claims seem outlandish.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139325,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:41","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:41","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:41-42<\/strong> When Jesus identified himself as the true <em>bread . . . from heaven<\/em><em>,<\/em> the crowd faced a decision. • <em>Isn’t this . . . the son of Joseph?<\/em> They stumbled because their familiarity with Jesus made his claims seem outlandish.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:41-42<\/strong> When Jesus identified himself as the true <em>bread . . . from heaven<\/em><em>,<\/em> the crowd faced a decision. • <em>Isn’t this . . . the son of Joseph?<\/em> They stumbled because their familiarity with Jesus made his claims seem outlandish.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:41-42 When Jesus identified himself as the true bread . . . from heaven, the crowd faced a decision. • Isn’t this . . . the son of Joseph? They stumbled because their familiarity with Jesus made his claims seem outlandish.","summary_en":"6:41-42 When Jesus identified himself as the true bread . . . from heaven, the crowd faced a decision. • Isn’t this . . . the son of Joseph? They stumbled because their familiarity with Jesus made his claims seem outlandish.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":62357,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Complaints","title_en":"Complaints","content_ro":"<h3>Complaints<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible generally depicts complaining as wrong. For example, God judged the Israelites for grumbling about their hardships in the wilderness (Num 14:27-37). Job complained mightily and earned God’s rebuke for it, yet God ultimately confirmed Job’s righteousness and rejected those who tried to stop him from complaining (Job 42:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>Job’s fundamental complaint was that God did not give him a fair hearing to demonstrate his innocence. Job’s friends attacked him for trying to vindicate himself, but God upheld Job’s innocence. In a gracious but firm act of self-revelation, God rebuked Job for his overreaching self-defense and implied criticism of God’s fairness. God shifted Job’s focus away from his troubles and toward God himself (Job 38–41).<\/p>\n<p>Scripture admonishes us to rejoice and give thanks in all situations (Eph 5:20; Phil 4:4; 1 Thes 5:16-18). It also calls us to endure through suffering and to persist in prayer (Jas 5:10-18). If we do want to complain in prayer, we should follow the pattern of the psalms, which lead us past ourselves and back to God (see, e.g., Ps 13). Job’s positive example (Jas 5:11) is not so much in how he responded to his troubles or to his comforters but in how he responded to God (Job 40:3-5; 42:1-6). In the midst of difficult and confusing situations that may precipitate a desire to complain, we can still acknowledge the sovereignty and goodness of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 4:13-14; Exod 16:2-18; Num 14:27-37; 1 Kgs 19:3-18; Job 3:1-26; 6:1–7:21; Pss 38; 39; 44; 73; Jer 20:14-18; Jon 4:1-11; Matt 27:46; John 6:41-59; 1 Cor 10:1-10; Eph 5:20; Phil 2:14-15; Jas 5:9-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Complaints<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible generally depicts complaining as wrong. For example, God judged the Israelites for grumbling about their hardships in the wilderness (Num 14:27-37). Job complained mightily and earned God’s rebuke for it, yet God ultimately confirmed Job’s righteousness and rejected those who tried to stop him from complaining (Job 42:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>Job’s fundamental complaint was that God did not give him a fair hearing to demonstrate his innocence. Job’s friends attacked him for trying to vindicate himself, but God upheld Job’s innocence. In a gracious but firm act of self-revelation, God rebuked Job for his overreaching self-defense and implied criticism of God’s fairness. God shifted Job’s focus away from his troubles and toward God himself (Job 38–41).<\/p>\n<p>Scripture admonishes us to rejoice and give thanks in all situations (Eph 5:20; Phil 4:4; 1 Thes 5:16-18). It also calls us to endure through suffering and to persist in prayer (Jas 5:10-18). If we do want to complain in prayer, we should follow the pattern of the psalms, which lead us past ourselves and back to God (see, e.g., Ps 13). Job’s positive example (Jas 5:11) is not so much in how he responded to his troubles or to his comforters but in how he responded to God (Job 40:3-5; 42:1-6). In the midst of difficult and confusing situations that may precipitate a desire to complain, we can still acknowledge the sovereignty and goodness of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 4:13-14; Exod 16:2-18; Num 14:27-37; 1 Kgs 19:3-18; Job 3:1-26; 6:1–7:21; Pss 38; 39; 44; 73; Jer 20:14-18; Jon 4:1-11; Matt 27:46; John 6:41-59; 1 Cor 10:1-10; Eph 5:20; Phil 2:14-15; Jas 5:9-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Complaints The Bible generally depicts complaining as wrong. For example, God judged the Israelites for grumbling about their hardships in the wilderness (Num 14:27-37). Job complained mightily and earned God’s rebuke for it, yet God ultimately confirmed Job’s righteousness and rejected those who tried to stop him from complaining (Job 42:7-8). Job’s fundamental complaint was that God did not give him a fair hearing to demonstrate his innocence. Job’s friends attacked him for trying to vindic...","summary_en":"Complaints The Bible generally depicts complaining as wrong. For example, God judged the Israelites for grumbling about their hardships in the wilderness (Num 14:27-37). Job complained mightily and earned God’s rebuke for it, yet God ultimately confirmed Job’s righteousness and rejected those who tried to stop him from complaining (Job 42:7-8). Job’s fundamental complaint was that God did not give him a fair hearing to demonstrate his innocence. Job’s friends attacked him for trying to vindic...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":89983,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Complaints","title_en":"Complaints","content_ro":"<h3>Complaints<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible generally depicts complaining as wrong. For example, God judged the Israelites for grumbling about their hardships in the wilderness (Num 14:27-37). Job complained mightily and earned God’s rebuke for it, yet God ultimately confirmed Job’s righteousness and rejected those who tried to stop him from complaining (Job 42:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>Job’s fundamental complaint was that God did not give him a fair hearing to demonstrate his innocence. Job’s friends attacked him for trying to vindicate himself, but God upheld Job’s innocence. In a gracious but firm act of self-revelation, God rebuked Job for his overreaching self-defense and implied criticism of God’s fairness. God shifted Job’s focus away from his troubles and toward God himself (Job 38–41).<\/p>\n<p>Scripture admonishes us to rejoice and give thanks in all situations (Eph 5:20; Phil 4:4; 1 Thes 5:16-18). It also calls us to endure through suffering and to persist in prayer (Jas 5:10-18). If we do want to complain in prayer, we should follow the pattern of the psalms, which lead us past ourselves and back to God (see, e.g., Ps 13). Job’s positive example (Jas 5:11) is not so much in how he responded to his troubles or to his comforters but in how he responded to God (Job 40:3-5; 42:1-6). In the midst of difficult and confusing situations that may precipitate a desire to complain, we can still acknowledge the sovereignty and goodness of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 4:13-14; Exod 16:2-18; Num 14:27-37; 1 Kgs 19:3-18; Job 3:1-26; 6:1–7:21; Pss 38; 39; 44; 73; Jer 20:14-18; Jon 4:1-11; Matt 27:46; John 6:41-59; 1 Cor 10:1-10; Eph 5:20; Phil 2:14-15; Jas 5:9-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Complaints<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible generally depicts complaining as wrong. For example, God judged the Israelites for grumbling about their hardships in the wilderness (Num 14:27-37). Job complained mightily and earned God’s rebuke for it, yet God ultimately confirmed Job’s righteousness and rejected those who tried to stop him from complaining (Job 42:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>Job’s fundamental complaint was that God did not give him a fair hearing to demonstrate his innocence. Job’s friends attacked him for trying to vindicate himself, but God upheld Job’s innocence. In a gracious but firm act of self-revelation, God rebuked Job for his overreaching self-defense and implied criticism of God’s fairness. God shifted Job’s focus away from his troubles and toward God himself (Job 38–41).<\/p>\n<p>Scripture admonishes us to rejoice and give thanks in all situations (Eph 5:20; Phil 4:4; 1 Thes 5:16-18). It also calls us to endure through suffering and to persist in prayer (Jas 5:10-18). If we do want to complain in prayer, we should follow the pattern of the psalms, which lead us past ourselves and back to God (see, e.g., Ps 13). Job’s positive example (Jas 5:11) is not so much in how he responded to his troubles or to his comforters but in how he responded to God (Job 40:3-5; 42:1-6). In the midst of difficult and confusing situations that may precipitate a desire to complain, we can still acknowledge the sovereignty and goodness of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 4:13-14; Exod 16:2-18; Num 14:27-37; 1 Kgs 19:3-18; Job 3:1-26; 6:1–7:21; Pss 38; 39; 44; 73; Jer 20:14-18; Jon 4:1-11; Matt 27:46; John 6:41-59; 1 Cor 10:1-10; Eph 5:20; Phil 2:14-15; Jas 5:9-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Complaints The Bible generally depicts complaining as wrong. For example, God judged the Israelites for grumbling about their hardships in the wilderness (Num 14:27-37). Job complained mightily and earned God’s rebuke for it, yet God ultimately confirmed Job’s righteousness and rejected those who tried to stop him from complaining (Job 42:7-8). Job’s fundamental complaint was that God did not give him a fair hearing to demonstrate his innocence. Job’s friends attacked him for trying to vindic...","summary_en":"Complaints The Bible generally depicts complaining as wrong. For example, God judged the Israelites for grumbling about their hardships in the wilderness (Num 14:27-37). Job complained mightily and earned God’s rebuke for it, yet God ultimately confirmed Job’s righteousness and rejected those who tried to stop him from complaining (Job 42:7-8). Job’s fundamental complaint was that God did not give him a fair hearing to demonstrate his innocence. Job’s friends attacked him for trying to vindic...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":117609,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Complaints","title_en":"Complaints","content_ro":"<h3>Complaints<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible generally depicts complaining as wrong. For example, God judged the Israelites for grumbling about their hardships in the wilderness (Num 14:27-37). Job complained mightily and earned God’s rebuke for it, yet God ultimately confirmed Job’s righteousness and rejected those who tried to stop him from complaining (Job 42:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>Job’s fundamental complaint was that God did not give him a fair hearing to demonstrate his innocence. Job’s friends attacked him for trying to vindicate himself, but God upheld Job’s innocence. In a gracious but firm act of self-revelation, God rebuked Job for his overreaching self-defense and implied criticism of God’s fairness. God shifted Job’s focus away from his troubles and toward God himself (Job 38–41).<\/p>\n<p>Scripture admonishes us to rejoice and give thanks in all situations (Eph 5:20; Phil 4:4; 1 Thes 5:16-18). It also calls us to endure through suffering and to persist in prayer (Jas 5:10-18). If we do want to complain in prayer, we should follow the pattern of the psalms, which lead us past ourselves and back to God (see, e.g., Ps 13). Job’s positive example (Jas 5:11) is not so much in how he responded to his troubles or to his comforters but in how he responded to God (Job 40:3-5; 42:1-6). In the midst of difficult and confusing situations that may precipitate a desire to complain, we can still acknowledge the sovereignty and goodness of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 4:13-14; Exod 16:2-18; Num 14:27-37; 1 Kgs 19:3-18; Job 3:1-26; 6:1–7:21; Pss 38; 39; 44; 73; Jer 20:14-18; Jon 4:1-11; Matt 27:46; John 6:41-59; 1 Cor 10:1-10; Eph 5:20; Phil 2:14-15; Jas 5:9-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Complaints<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible generally depicts complaining as wrong. For example, God judged the Israelites for grumbling about their hardships in the wilderness (Num 14:27-37). Job complained mightily and earned God’s rebuke for it, yet God ultimately confirmed Job’s righteousness and rejected those who tried to stop him from complaining (Job 42:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>Job’s fundamental complaint was that God did not give him a fair hearing to demonstrate his innocence. Job’s friends attacked him for trying to vindicate himself, but God upheld Job’s innocence. In a gracious but firm act of self-revelation, God rebuked Job for his overreaching self-defense and implied criticism of God’s fairness. God shifted Job’s focus away from his troubles and toward God himself (Job 38–41).<\/p>\n<p>Scripture admonishes us to rejoice and give thanks in all situations (Eph 5:20; Phil 4:4; 1 Thes 5:16-18). It also calls us to endure through suffering and to persist in prayer (Jas 5:10-18). If we do want to complain in prayer, we should follow the pattern of the psalms, which lead us past ourselves and back to God (see, e.g., Ps 13). Job’s positive example (Jas 5:11) is not so much in how he responded to his troubles or to his comforters but in how he responded to God (Job 40:3-5; 42:1-6). In the midst of difficult and confusing situations that may precipitate a desire to complain, we can still acknowledge the sovereignty and goodness of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 4:13-14; Exod 16:2-18; Num 14:27-37; 1 Kgs 19:3-18; Job 3:1-26; 6:1–7:21; Pss 38; 39; 44; 73; Jer 20:14-18; Jon 4:1-11; Matt 27:46; John 6:41-59; 1 Cor 10:1-10; Eph 5:20; Phil 2:14-15; Jas 5:9-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Complaints The Bible generally depicts complaining as wrong. For example, God judged the Israelites for grumbling about their hardships in the wilderness (Num 14:27-37). Job complained mightily and earned God’s rebuke for it, yet God ultimately confirmed Job’s righteousness and rejected those who tried to stop him from complaining (Job 42:7-8). Job’s fundamental complaint was that God did not give him a fair hearing to demonstrate his innocence. Job’s friends attacked him for trying to vindic...","summary_en":"Complaints The Bible generally depicts complaining as wrong. For example, God judged the Israelites for grumbling about their hardships in the wilderness (Num 14:27-37). Job complained mightily and earned God’s rebuke for it, yet God ultimately confirmed Job’s righteousness and rejected those who tried to stop him from complaining (Job 42:7-8). Job’s fundamental complaint was that God did not give him a fair hearing to demonstrate his innocence. Job’s friends attacked him for trying to vindic...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":145235,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Complaints","title_en":"Complaints","content_ro":"<h3>Complaints<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible generally depicts complaining as wrong. For example, God judged the Israelites for grumbling about their hardships in the wilderness (Num 14:27-37). Job complained mightily and earned God’s rebuke for it, yet God ultimately confirmed Job’s righteousness and rejected those who tried to stop him from complaining (Job 42:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>Job’s fundamental complaint was that God did not give him a fair hearing to demonstrate his innocence. Job’s friends attacked him for trying to vindicate himself, but God upheld Job’s innocence. In a gracious but firm act of self-revelation, God rebuked Job for his overreaching self-defense and implied criticism of God’s fairness. God shifted Job’s focus away from his troubles and toward God himself (Job 38–41).<\/p>\n<p>Scripture admonishes us to rejoice and give thanks in all situations (Eph 5:20; Phil 4:4; 1 Thes 5:16-18). It also calls us to endure through suffering and to persist in prayer (Jas 5:10-18). If we do want to complain in prayer, we should follow the pattern of the psalms, which lead us past ourselves and back to God (see, e.g., Ps 13). Job’s positive example (Jas 5:11) is not so much in how he responded to his troubles or to his comforters but in how he responded to God (Job 40:3-5; 42:1-6). In the midst of difficult and confusing situations that may precipitate a desire to complain, we can still acknowledge the sovereignty and goodness of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 4:13-14; Exod 16:2-18; Num 14:27-37; 1 Kgs 19:3-18; Job 3:1-26; 6:1–7:21; Pss 38; 39; 44; 73; Jer 20:14-18; Jon 4:1-11; Matt 27:46; John 6:41-59; 1 Cor 10:1-10; Eph 5:20; Phil 2:14-15; Jas 5:9-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Complaints<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible generally depicts complaining as wrong. For example, God judged the Israelites for grumbling about their hardships in the wilderness (Num 14:27-37). Job complained mightily and earned God’s rebuke for it, yet God ultimately confirmed Job’s righteousness and rejected those who tried to stop him from complaining (Job 42:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>Job’s fundamental complaint was that God did not give him a fair hearing to demonstrate his innocence. Job’s friends attacked him for trying to vindicate himself, but God upheld Job’s innocence. In a gracious but firm act of self-revelation, God rebuked Job for his overreaching self-defense and implied criticism of God’s fairness. God shifted Job’s focus away from his troubles and toward God himself (Job 38–41).<\/p>\n<p>Scripture admonishes us to rejoice and give thanks in all situations (Eph 5:20; Phil 4:4; 1 Thes 5:16-18). It also calls us to endure through suffering and to persist in prayer (Jas 5:10-18). If we do want to complain in prayer, we should follow the pattern of the psalms, which lead us past ourselves and back to God (see, e.g., Ps 13). Job’s positive example (Jas 5:11) is not so much in how he responded to his troubles or to his comforters but in how he responded to God (Job 40:3-5; 42:1-6). In the midst of difficult and confusing situations that may precipitate a desire to complain, we can still acknowledge the sovereignty and goodness of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 4:13-14; Exod 16:2-18; Num 14:27-37; 1 Kgs 19:3-18; Job 3:1-26; 6:1–7:21; Pss 38; 39; 44; 73; Jer 20:14-18; Jon 4:1-11; Matt 27:46; John 6:41-59; 1 Cor 10:1-10; Eph 5:20; Phil 2:14-15; Jas 5:9-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Complaints The Bible generally depicts complaining as wrong. For example, God judged the Israelites for grumbling about their hardships in the wilderness (Num 14:27-37). Job complained mightily and earned God’s rebuke for it, yet God ultimately confirmed Job’s righteousness and rejected those who tried to stop him from complaining (Job 42:7-8). Job’s fundamental complaint was that God did not give him a fair hearing to demonstrate his innocence. Job’s friends attacked him for trying to vindic...","summary_en":"Complaints The Bible generally depicts complaining as wrong. For example, God judged the Israelites for grumbling about their hardships in the wilderness (Num 14:27-37). Job complained mightily and earned God’s rebuke for it, yet God ultimately confirmed Job’s righteousness and rejected those who tried to stop him from complaining (Job 42:7-8). Job’s fundamental complaint was that God did not give him a fair hearing to demonstrate his innocence. Job’s friends attacked him for trying to vindic...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"42":[{"id":20585,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Joseph","title_en":"Joseph","content_ro":"<h3>JOSEPH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Jacob’s 11th son and the firstborn son of Rachel. Rachel named the boy Joseph, meaning “may he add,” expressing her desire that God would give her another son (Gn 30:24).<\/li>\n<p>Nothing more is said about Joseph until, at the age of 17, he is seen tending his father’s flocks with his brothers (Gn 37:2). Joseph was the favorite of his father, since he was the son of his old age (v 3) and the firstborn son of his favorite wife. Because of this, his brothers hated Joseph. This envy was magnified when Jacob gave Joseph a ground-length, long-sleeved, multicolored robe (vv 3-4). (This type of garment is illustrated by the paintings in the Asiatic tombs of Khnumhotep II at Beni Hasan and of the nobles at Gurneh, near Luxor.) The animosity of his brothers increased still more when Joseph revealed to them his dreams of dominion over them (vv 5-11). Subsequently, when Joseph was sent to check on his brothers and the flocks near Shechem, his brothers sold him to a caravan of traders going down to Egypt (vv 25-28). His brothers then took his robe, dipped it in goat’s blood, and brought it to Jacob, who concluded that Joseph had been killed by wild animals (vv 31-33); Jacob was overwhelmed with grief (vv 34-35).<\/p>\n<p>In Egypt, Joseph was sold to Potiphar, an Egyptian officer of the guard (Gn 37:36; 39:1), who eventually put Joseph in charge of his entire household. However, trouble arose from Potiphar’s wife, who was attracted to the young Hebrew and tried to seduce him (39:6-10). He steadfastly resisted her advances, protesting that to comply with her wishes would be a disservice to his master and a sin against God (v 9). One day she seized his garment, but he left the garment behind and fled. Potiphar’s wife accused Joseph of attempted rape; her report was believed, and Joseph was incarcerated in the king’s prison (v 20), where Pharaoh’s butler and baker were also confined. While in prison, Joseph, with the Lord’s help, interpreted these men’s troublesome dreams. As Joseph had foretold, the baker was executed and the butler was restored to royal favor (ch 40).<\/p>\n<p>Two years later Pharaoh had two dreams that his magicians and wise men could not interpret. The butler, remembering Joseph, had him summoned from prison. God revealed to Joseph that the dreams foretold seven years of abundance, followed by seven years of famine (Gn 41:25-36). Pharaoh, impressed with Joseph’s interpretation, made him ruler of Egypt, second only to himself (vv 39-44). Joseph was given a new name, Zaphenath-paneah, and a wife, Asenath, the daughter of Potiphera (v 45).<\/p>\n<p>Joseph was 30 years old when he became ruler of Egypt. During the seven years of prosperity, he gathered the good supplies for the seven years of famine to come (Gn 41:53-56). When the famine eventually became severe in Palestine, Jacob sent all his sons, except Benjamin, his youngest son, to Egypt to purchase grain. Appearing before Joseph in Egypt, they did not recognize him. But he knew them and remembered his dreams of years before (42:8-9). After listening to the report of their family, he accused them of being spies (vv 9-14) and insisted that they leave one of their brothers as hostage and return with Benjamin to verify the truthfulness of their report (vv 19-20). Thus Simeon was bound and left in Egypt (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>After the famine worsened in Palestine, Jacob asked his sons to go back to Egypt to buy more grain (Gn 43:1-2); reluctantly agreeing to the conditions that the Egyptian administrator had placed on them, Jacob allowed Benjamin to go with them (vv 11-13). When they arrived in Egypt, they were taken to Joseph’s house, where Simeon was restored to them (v 23) and a meal was prepared for them (v 33). Joseph at last disclosed his identity and declared that God had sent him before them to preserve their lives (45:4-8). Arrangements were then made to send for Jacob; wagons were provided, along with provisions for the journey (v 21). When Jacob came to Goshen in the Nile Delta, Joseph went out to meet him, and another great reunion took place (46:28-29). He also presented his father and brothers to Pharaoh, who let them live in the land of Goshen (47:6).<\/p>\n<p>Upon learning that his father was ill, Joseph took his two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim, to him for his blessing. He presented the sons so that the older would be at Jacob’s right hand and the younger at his left in order that Manasseh would receive the blessing of the firstborn. Jacob, however, crossed his hands and with his right hand on Ephraim gave him the greater blessing (Gn 48:14-20). He also gave to Joseph the land that he had taken from the Amorites (v 22). At Jacob’s death, Joseph made the funeral arrangements; and after the customary funerary practices were carried out, a great funeral procession went to Canaan, where Jacob was buried by his sons in the cave of Machpelah near Hebron (50:1-12).<\/p>\n<p>When Joseph was 110 years old, he called his brothers and told them that he was about to die. He made them take an oath that when they returned to Canaan they would take his bones with them. So he died, was embalmed, and was placed in a coffin in Egypt (Gn 50:26). Many years later, during the exodus, Moses took the bones of Joseph with him from Egypt (Ex 13:19). Joseph’s remains were eventually interred at Shechem in the parcel of land that Jacob had bought from Hamor, the father of Shechem (Gn 33:18-20; Jos 24:32). <em>See<\/em> Israel, History of; Patriarchs, Period of the.<\/p>\n<li>2. Igal’s father from Issachar’s tribe. Igal was one of the 12 spies sent by Moses to search out the land of Canaan (Nm 13:7).<\/li>\n<li>3. Asaph’s second son and the leader of the first course of priests serving in the sanctuary during David’s reign (1 Chr 25:2, 9).<\/li>\n<li>4. One of Binnui’s descendants who was encouraged by Ezra to divorce his foreign wife during the postexilic era (Ezr 10:42).<\/li>\n<li>5. Priest and family leader from Shebaniah’s line during the days of Joiakim, the high priest (Neh 12:14).<\/li>\n<li>6. Descendant of David (Mt 1:16; Lk 3:23) and the husband of Mary, the mother of Jesus. Joseph was betrothed to Mary, a young woman of the city of Nazareth. Mary had learned from the angel Gabriel that she was to bear the Son of God, whom she was to name Jesus (Lk 1:31) and that this conception was to be a work of the Holy Spirit (v 35). Joseph was not aware of this, so when he learned that Mary was pregnant, he decided to divorce her quietly, for he was a just man and did not want to humiliate her publicly (Mt 1:19). An angel subsequently appeared to him in a dream to tell him what was happening (Mt 1:21; cf. Is 7:14). The text of Matthew makes it clear that there was no sexual union between Joseph and Mary until after Jesus was born (Mt 1:18, 25; see also Lk 1:34-37).<\/li>\n<p>When Caesar Augustus issued a decree that everyone had to register in his native city for purposes of taxation, Joseph and Mary returned to Bethlehem, where Jesus was subsequently born (Lk 2:1-6). Later, Joseph and Mary took the infant Jesus to the temple to present him to the Lord (vv 22, 33). After the visit of the wise men, an angel appeared to Joseph in a dream and instructed him to take Jesus and Mary to Egypt to protect the child from King Herod (Mt 2:13). Upon the death of Herod, an angel similarly advised him to return to Israel, so the family went to live in Nazareth. The last recorded event that involves Joseph is the incident of Jesus at the temple at age 12 (Lk 2:41-51). Joseph is not mentioned by name, but Mary told Jesus that she and his father had been looking for him anxiously.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was identified by people around Nazareth as “Joseph’s son” (Lk 4:22; Jn 1:45; 6:42). It is only through references identifying Jesus that we learn of Joseph’s trade. Twice Jesus is referred to as “the carpenter’s son” (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3). Joseph was not a carpenter in our sense of the word, for houses were built mostly of stone and earth. He was a woodworker or artificer in wood, and probably most of his work was with furniture and agricultural implements.<\/p>\n<p>During the ministry of Jesus, it was his mother and his brothers who came to look for him (Mt 12:46-50; Mk 3:31-35), so it is assumed that by this time Joseph was dead. Joseph was most likely the father of James, Joseph, Simon, Judas, and unnamed sisters (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Brothers of Jesus; Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<li>7. Joseph and Mary’s son and the brother of Jesus (Mt 13:55); alternately called Joses in Mark 6:3. <em>See<\/em> Brothers of Jesus.<\/li>\n<li>8. Native of Arimathea and the follower of Jesus who provided for his burial. He was a rich man from the town of Arimathea and a respected member of the Sanhedrin, or council (Mk 15:43). He was a good and righteous man and did not go along with the decision to crucify Jesus (Lk 23:50-51). Joseph had been a secret follower of Jesus because he was afraid of the Jews (Jn 19:38), but after the Crucifixion he took courage and went to Pilate to ask for Jesus’ body. He and Nicodemus took the body, treated it with spices, and wrapped it in linen cloths, according to the Jewish burial customs. In a nearby garden was Joseph’s own new rock-cut tomb in which no one had ever been buried. Here they placed Jesus and sealed the tomb with a large stone.<\/li>\n<li> 9. Mattathias’s son and an ancestor of Jesus (Lk 3:25). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>\n<li>10. KJV rendering of Josech, an ancestor of Jesus, in Luke 3:26. <em>See<\/em> Josech.<\/li>\n<li>11. Jonam’s son and an ancestor of Jesus (Lk 3:30). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>\n<li>12. Disciple of Jesus who was “called Barsabbas” and “surnamed Justus” (Acts 1:23). Joseph was one of the candidates put forward by the 11 apostles to replace Judas Iscariot. It was Matthias, however, who was chosen.<\/li>\n<li>13. Cypriot Levite who sold a field and gave the proceeds to the apostles. He was surnamed “Barnabas,” meaning “son of encouragement,” by the apostles (Acts 4:36). <em>See<\/em> Barnabas.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>JOSEPH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Jacob’s 11th son and the firstborn son of Rachel. Rachel named the boy Joseph, meaning “may he add,” expressing her desire that God would give her another son (Gn 30:24).<\/li>\n<p>Nothing more is said about Joseph until, at the age of 17, he is seen tending his father’s flocks with his brothers (Gn 37:2). Joseph was the favorite of his father, since he was the son of his old age (v 3) and the firstborn son of his favorite wife. Because of this, his brothers hated Joseph. This envy was magnified when Jacob gave Joseph a ground-length, long-sleeved, multicolored robe (vv 3-4). (This type of garment is illustrated by the paintings in the Asiatic tombs of Khnumhotep II at Beni Hasan and of the nobles at Gurneh, near Luxor.) The animosity of his brothers increased still more when Joseph revealed to them his dreams of dominion over them (vv 5-11). Subsequently, when Joseph was sent to check on his brothers and the flocks near Shechem, his brothers sold him to a caravan of traders going down to Egypt (vv 25-28). His brothers then took his robe, dipped it in goat’s blood, and brought it to Jacob, who concluded that Joseph had been killed by wild animals (vv 31-33); Jacob was overwhelmed with grief (vv 34-35).<\/p>\n<p>In Egypt, Joseph was sold to Potiphar, an Egyptian officer of the guard (Gn 37:36; 39:1), who eventually put Joseph in charge of his entire household. However, trouble arose from Potiphar’s wife, who was attracted to the young Hebrew and tried to seduce him (39:6-10). He steadfastly resisted her advances, protesting that to comply with her wishes would be a disservice to his master and a sin against God (v 9). One day she seized his garment, but he left the garment behind and fled. Potiphar’s wife accused Joseph of attempted rape; her report was believed, and Joseph was incarcerated in the king’s prison (v 20), where Pharaoh’s butler and baker were also confined. While in prison, Joseph, with the Lord’s help, interpreted these men’s troublesome dreams. As Joseph had foretold, the baker was executed and the butler was restored to royal favor (ch 40).<\/p>\n<p>Two years later Pharaoh had two dreams that his magicians and wise men could not interpret. The butler, remembering Joseph, had him summoned from prison. God revealed to Joseph that the dreams foretold seven years of abundance, followed by seven years of famine (Gn 41:25-36). Pharaoh, impressed with Joseph’s interpretation, made him ruler of Egypt, second only to himself (vv 39-44). Joseph was given a new name, Zaphenath-paneah, and a wife, Asenath, the daughter of Potiphera (v 45).<\/p>\n<p>Joseph was 30 years old when he became ruler of Egypt. During the seven years of prosperity, he gathered the good supplies for the seven years of famine to come (Gn 41:53-56). When the famine eventually became severe in Palestine, Jacob sent all his sons, except Benjamin, his youngest son, to Egypt to purchase grain. Appearing before Joseph in Egypt, they did not recognize him. But he knew them and remembered his dreams of years before (42:8-9). After listening to the report of their family, he accused them of being spies (vv 9-14) and insisted that they leave one of their brothers as hostage and return with Benjamin to verify the truthfulness of their report (vv 19-20). Thus Simeon was bound and left in Egypt (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>After the famine worsened in Palestine, Jacob asked his sons to go back to Egypt to buy more grain (Gn 43:1-2); reluctantly agreeing to the conditions that the Egyptian administrator had placed on them, Jacob allowed Benjamin to go with them (vv 11-13). When they arrived in Egypt, they were taken to Joseph’s house, where Simeon was restored to them (v 23) and a meal was prepared for them (v 33). Joseph at last disclosed his identity and declared that God had sent him before them to preserve their lives (45:4-8). Arrangements were then made to send for Jacob; wagons were provided, along with provisions for the journey (v 21). When Jacob came to Goshen in the Nile Delta, Joseph went out to meet him, and another great reunion took place (46:28-29). He also presented his father and brothers to Pharaoh, who let them live in the land of Goshen (47:6).<\/p>\n<p>Upon learning that his father was ill, Joseph took his two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim, to him for his blessing. He presented the sons so that the older would be at Jacob’s right hand and the younger at his left in order that Manasseh would receive the blessing of the firstborn. Jacob, however, crossed his hands and with his right hand on Ephraim gave him the greater blessing (Gn 48:14-20). He also gave to Joseph the land that he had taken from the Amorites (v 22). At Jacob’s death, Joseph made the funeral arrangements; and after the customary funerary practices were carried out, a great funeral procession went to Canaan, where Jacob was buried by his sons in the cave of Machpelah near Hebron (50:1-12).<\/p>\n<p>When Joseph was 110 years old, he called his brothers and told them that he was about to die. He made them take an oath that when they returned to Canaan they would take his bones with them. So he died, was embalmed, and was placed in a coffin in Egypt (Gn 50:26). Many years later, during the exodus, Moses took the bones of Joseph with him from Egypt (Ex 13:19). Joseph’s remains were eventually interred at Shechem in the parcel of land that Jacob had bought from Hamor, the father of Shechem (Gn 33:18-20; Jos 24:32). <em>See<\/em> Israel, History of; Patriarchs, Period of the.<\/p>\n<li>2. Igal’s father from Issachar’s tribe. Igal was one of the 12 spies sent by Moses to search out the land of Canaan (Nm 13:7).<\/li>\n<li>3. Asaph’s second son and the leader of the first course of priests serving in the sanctuary during David’s reign (1 Chr 25:2, 9).<\/li>\n<li>4. One of Binnui’s descendants who was encouraged by Ezra to divorce his foreign wife during the postexilic era (Ezr 10:42).<\/li>\n<li>5. Priest and family leader from Shebaniah’s line during the days of Joiakim, the high priest (Neh 12:14).<\/li>\n<li>6. Descendant of David (Mt 1:16; Lk 3:23) and the husband of Mary, the mother of Jesus. Joseph was betrothed to Mary, a young woman of the city of Nazareth. Mary had learned from the angel Gabriel that she was to bear the Son of God, whom she was to name Jesus (Lk 1:31) and that this conception was to be a work of the Holy Spirit (v 35). Joseph was not aware of this, so when he learned that Mary was pregnant, he decided to divorce her quietly, for he was a just man and did not want to humiliate her publicly (Mt 1:19). An angel subsequently appeared to him in a dream to tell him what was happening (Mt 1:21; cf. Is 7:14). The text of Matthew makes it clear that there was no sexual union between Joseph and Mary until after Jesus was born (Mt 1:18, 25; see also Lk 1:34-37).<\/li>\n<p>When Caesar Augustus issued a decree that everyone had to register in his native city for purposes of taxation, Joseph and Mary returned to Bethlehem, where Jesus was subsequently born (Lk 2:1-6). Later, Joseph and Mary took the infant Jesus to the temple to present him to the Lord (vv 22, 33). After the visit of the wise men, an angel appeared to Joseph in a dream and instructed him to take Jesus and Mary to Egypt to protect the child from King Herod (Mt 2:13). Upon the death of Herod, an angel similarly advised him to return to Israel, so the family went to live in Nazareth. The last recorded event that involves Joseph is the incident of Jesus at the temple at age 12 (Lk 2:41-51). Joseph is not mentioned by name, but Mary told Jesus that she and his father had been looking for him anxiously.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was identified by people around Nazareth as “Joseph’s son” (Lk 4:22; Jn 1:45; 6:42). It is only through references identifying Jesus that we learn of Joseph’s trade. Twice Jesus is referred to as “the carpenter’s son” (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3). Joseph was not a carpenter in our sense of the word, for houses were built mostly of stone and earth. He was a woodworker or artificer in wood, and probably most of his work was with furniture and agricultural implements.<\/p>\n<p>During the ministry of Jesus, it was his mother and his brothers who came to look for him (Mt 12:46-50; Mk 3:31-35), so it is assumed that by this time Joseph was dead. Joseph was most likely the father of James, Joseph, Simon, Judas, and unnamed sisters (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Brothers of Jesus; Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<li>7. Joseph and Mary’s son and the brother of Jesus (Mt 13:55); alternately called Joses in Mark 6:3. <em>See<\/em> Brothers of Jesus.<\/li>\n<li>8. Native of Arimathea and the follower of Jesus who provided for his burial. He was a rich man from the town of Arimathea and a respected member of the Sanhedrin, or council (Mk 15:43). He was a good and righteous man and did not go along with the decision to crucify Jesus (Lk 23:50-51). Joseph had been a secret follower of Jesus because he was afraid of the Jews (Jn 19:38), but after the Crucifixion he took courage and went to Pilate to ask for Jesus’ body. He and Nicodemus took the body, treated it with spices, and wrapped it in linen cloths, according to the Jewish burial customs. In a nearby garden was Joseph’s own new rock-cut tomb in which no one had ever been buried. Here they placed Jesus and sealed the tomb with a large stone.<\/li>\n<li> 9. Mattathias’s son and an ancestor of Jesus (Lk 3:25). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>\n<li>10. KJV rendering of Josech, an ancestor of Jesus, in Luke 3:26. <em>See<\/em> Josech.<\/li>\n<li>11. Jonam’s son and an ancestor of Jesus (Lk 3:30). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>\n<li>12. Disciple of Jesus who was “called Barsabbas” and “surnamed Justus” (Acts 1:23). Joseph was one of the candidates put forward by the 11 apostles to replace Judas Iscariot. It was Matthias, however, who was chosen.<\/li>\n<li>13. Cypriot Levite who sold a field and gave the proceeds to the apostles. He was surnamed “Barnabas,” meaning “son of encouragement,” by the apostles (Acts 4:36). <em>See<\/em> Barnabas.<\/li>","summary_ro":"JOSEPH 1. Jacob’s 11th son and the firstborn son of Rachel. Rachel named the boy Joseph, meaning “may he add,” expressing her desire that God would give her another son (Gn 30:24). Nothing more is said about Joseph until, at the age of 17, he is seen tending his father’s flocks with his brothers (Gn 37:2). Joseph was the favorite of his father, since he was the son of his old age (v 3) and the firstborn son of his favorite wife. Because of this, his brothers hated Joseph. This envy was magnif...","summary_en":"JOSEPH 1. Jacob’s 11th son and the firstborn son of Rachel. Rachel named the boy Joseph, meaning “may he add,” expressing her desire that God would give her another son (Gn 30:24). Nothing more is said about Joseph until, at the age of 17, he is seen tending his father’s flocks with his brothers (Gn 37:2). Joseph was the favorite of his father, since he was the son of his old age (v 3) and the firstborn son of his favorite wife. Because of this, his brothers hated Joseph. This envy was magnif...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"43":[{"id":56448,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:43","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:43","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:43-51<\/strong> <em>Stop complaining:<\/em> Rather than defending himself against their complaint (6:42), Jesus turns to the problem of their spiritual receptivity. Those who love the Father and listen to him will believe in Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:43-51<\/strong> <em>Stop complaining:<\/em> Rather than defending himself against their complaint (6:42), Jesus turns to the problem of their spiritual receptivity. Those who love the Father and listen to him will believe in Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:43-51 Stop complaining: Rather than defending himself against their complaint (6:42), Jesus turns to the problem of their spiritual receptivity. Those who love the Father and listen to him will believe in Jesus.","summary_en":"6:43-51 Stop complaining: Rather than defending himself against their complaint (6:42), Jesus turns to the problem of their spiritual receptivity. Those who love the Father and listen to him will believe in Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84074,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:43","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:43","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:43-51<\/strong> <em>Stop complaining:<\/em> Rather than defending himself against their complaint (6:42), Jesus turns to the problem of their spiritual receptivity. Those who love the Father and listen to him will believe in Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:43-51<\/strong> <em>Stop complaining:<\/em> Rather than defending himself against their complaint (6:42), Jesus turns to the problem of their spiritual receptivity. Those who love the Father and listen to him will believe in Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:43-51 Stop complaining: Rather than defending himself against their complaint (6:42), Jesus turns to the problem of their spiritual receptivity. Those who love the Father and listen to him will believe in Jesus.","summary_en":"6:43-51 Stop complaining: Rather than defending himself against their complaint (6:42), Jesus turns to the problem of their spiritual receptivity. Those who love the Father and listen to him will believe in Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111700,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:43","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:43","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:43-51<\/strong> <em>Stop complaining:<\/em> Rather than defending himself against their complaint (6:42), Jesus turns to the problem of their spiritual receptivity. Those who love the Father and listen to him will believe in Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:43-51<\/strong> <em>Stop complaining:<\/em> Rather than defending himself against their complaint (6:42), Jesus turns to the problem of their spiritual receptivity. Those who love the Father and listen to him will believe in Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:43-51 Stop complaining: Rather than defending himself against their complaint (6:42), Jesus turns to the problem of their spiritual receptivity. Those who love the Father and listen to him will believe in Jesus.","summary_en":"6:43-51 Stop complaining: Rather than defending himself against their complaint (6:42), Jesus turns to the problem of their spiritual receptivity. Those who love the Father and listen to him will believe in Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139326,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:43","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:43","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:43-51<\/strong> <em>Stop complaining:<\/em> Rather than defending himself against their complaint (6:42), Jesus turns to the problem of their spiritual receptivity. Those who love the Father and listen to him will believe in Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:43-51<\/strong> <em>Stop complaining:<\/em> Rather than defending himself against their complaint (6:42), Jesus turns to the problem of their spiritual receptivity. Those who love the Father and listen to him will believe in Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:43-51 Stop complaining: Rather than defending himself against their complaint (6:42), Jesus turns to the problem of their spiritual receptivity. Those who love the Father and listen to him will believe in Jesus.","summary_en":"6:43-51 Stop complaining: Rather than defending himself against their complaint (6:42), Jesus turns to the problem of their spiritual receptivity. Those who love the Father and listen to him will believe in Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"44":[{"id":67096,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead","title_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","summary_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94722,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead","title_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","summary_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122348,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead","title_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","summary_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149974,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead","title_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","summary_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"47":[{"id":60606,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88232,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115858,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143484,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"48":[{"id":4697,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Bible*, Inspiration","title_en":"of the Bible*, Inspiration","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, I<span>nspiration of the<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Theological term for the influence God exerted on the writers of Scripture, enabling them to transmit his revelations in writing.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible itself tells us that it is an inspired text. It says, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Tm 3:16, <span>kjv<\/span>). A translation closer to the original language (Greek) would be, “All Scripture is God-breathed” (<span>niv<\/span>). This tells us that every word of the Bible was breathed out from God. The words of the Bible came from God and were written by men. The apostle Peter affirmed this when he said that “no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Pt 1:20-21, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>“Men spoke from God.” This short sentence is the key to understanding how the Bible came into being. Thousands of years ago, God chose certain men—such as Moses, David, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel—to receive his words and write them down. What they wrote became books, or sections, of the OT. Nearly 2,000 years ago, God chose other men—such as Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul—to communicate his new message, the message of salvation through Jesus Christ. What they wrote became books, or sections, of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>God gave his words to these men in many different ways. Certain writers of the OT received messages directly from God. Moses was given the Ten Commandments inscribed on a stone when he was in God’s presence on Mt Sinai. When David was composing his psalms to God, he received divine inspiration to foretell certain events that would occur 1,000 years later in Jesus Christ’s life. God told his prophets—such as Isaiah and Jeremiah—exactly what to say; therefore, when they gave a message, it was God’s word, not their own. This is why many OT prophets often said, “Thus says the Lord.” (This statement appears over 2,000 times in the OT.) To other prophets, such as Ezekiel and Daniel, God communicated his message through visions and dreams. They recorded exactly what they saw, whether they understood it or not. And other OT writers, such as Samuel and Ezra, were directed by God to record events in the history of Israel.<\/p>\n\n<p>Four hundred years after the last book of the OT (Malachi) was written, God’s Son, Jesus Christ, came to earth. In his talks, he affirmed the divine authorship of the OT writings (see Mt 5:17-19; Lk 16:17; Jn 10:35). Furthermore, he often pointed to certain passages in the OT as having predicted certain events in his life (see Lk 24:27, 44). The NT writers also affirmed the divine inspiration of the OT text. It was the apostle Paul who was directed by God to write, “All Scripture is God-inspired.” Quite specifically, he was speaking of the OT. And, as was already noted, Peter said that the OT prophets were motivated by the Holy Spirit to speak from God.<\/p>\n<p>The NT is also a God-inspired book. Before Jesus left this earth and returned to his Father, he told the disciples that he would send the Holy Spirit to them. He told them that one of the functions of the Holy Spirit would be to remind them of all the things that Jesus had said and then to guide them into more truth (see Jn 14:26; 15:26; 16:13-15). Those who wrote the Gospels were helped by the Holy Spirit to remember Jesus’ exact words, and those who wrote other parts of the NT were guided by the Spirit as they wrote.<\/p>\n<p>The inspiration for writing the Gospels didn’t begin when the authors set pen to papyrus; the inspiration began when the disciples Matthew, Peter (for whom Mark wrote), and John were enlightened by their encounters with Jesus Christ, the Son of God. The apostles’ experiences with him altered their lives forever, imprinting on their souls unforgettable images of the revealed God-man, Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This is what John was speaking of in the prologue to his Gospel when he declared, “The Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory” (1:14, paraphrased). The “we” refers to those eyewitnesses of Jesus’ glory—the apostles who lived with Jesus for over three years. This reminiscence is expanded upon in John’s prologue to his first epistle, where he says “we have heard him, touched him, seen him, and looked upon him” (1 Jn 1:1-2, paraphrased). In both the Gospel and the Epistle, the verbs are in the perfect tense, denoting a past action with a present, abiding effect. Those past encounters with Jesus were never forgotten by John; they lived with him and stayed with him as an inspiring spirit until the day—many years later—he wrote of them in his Gospel. The same could be said for Matthew, who wrote an important Gospel, and Peter, who was really the author behind Mark’s composition. Luke was not an eyewitness, but he based his Gospel on the accounts of those who were (see Lk 1:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>The inspiration for the writing of the Epistles can also be traced to the writers’ encounters with the living Christ. The most prominent epistle writer, Paul, repeatedly claims that his inspiration and subsequent commission came from his encounter with the risen Christ (see, for example, 1 Cor 15:8-10). Peter also claims that his writings were based upon his experiences with the living Christ (see 1 Pt 5:1; 2 Pt 1:16-18). And so does John, who claims to have experienced the God-man visibly, audibly, and palpably (see 1 Jn 1:1-4). James and Jude make no such claim directly, but since they were the brothers of Jesus who became converts when they saw the risen Christ (this is certain for James—see 1 Cor 15:7—and presumed for Jude—see Acts 1:14), they too drew their inspiration from their encounters with the living Christ. Thus, all the epistle writers (with the possible exception of the one who wrote Hebrews, who is unknown) knew the living Christ. This is the relationship that qualified them to write those books that became part of the NT canon. This made them distinct from all others, no matter how good their writings were.<\/p>\n<p>The writers of the NT epistles were inspired by the Spirit when they wrote. Speaking for all the apostles, Paul indicated that the NT apostles were taught by the Holy Spirit what to say. The writers of the NT did not speak with words “taught by human wisdom,” but with “words taught by the Holy Spirit” (see 1 Cor 2:10-13). What they wrote was Spirit-taught. For example, when the apostle John saw that Jesus Christ had come to give eternal life to men, the Spirit helped him express this truth in many different ways. Thus, the reader of John’s Gospel sees different phrases about Jesus giving life: “in him was life,” “a well of living water springing up into eternal life,” “the bread of life,” “the light of life,” “the resurrection and the life,” etc. (see Jn 1:4; 4:14; 6:48; 8:12; 11:25; 14:6). When the apostle Paul contemplated the fullness of Christ’s deity, he was inspired by the Spirit to use such phrasing as “in him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily,” “in him are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge,” and “the unsearchable riches of Christ” (see Col 2:3, 9; Eph 3:8).<\/p>\n<p>As the Spirit taught the writers, they used their own vocabulary and writing style to express the thought of the Spirit. As such, the Scriptures came as the result of divine and human cooperation. The Scriptures were not mechanically inspired—as if God used the men as machines through whom he dictated the divine utterance. Rather, the Scriptures were inspired by God, then written by men. The Bible, therefore, is both fully divine and fully human.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, I<span>nspiration of the<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Theological term for the influence God exerted on the writers of Scripture, enabling them to transmit his revelations in writing.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible itself tells us that it is an inspired text. It says, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Tm 3:16, <span>kjv<\/span>). A translation closer to the original language (Greek) would be, “All Scripture is God-breathed” (<span>niv<\/span>). This tells us that every word of the Bible was breathed out from God. The words of the Bible came from God and were written by men. The apostle Peter affirmed this when he said that “no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Pt 1:20-21, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>“Men spoke from God.” This short sentence is the key to understanding how the Bible came into being. Thousands of years ago, God chose certain men—such as Moses, David, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel—to receive his words and write them down. What they wrote became books, or sections, of the OT. Nearly 2,000 years ago, God chose other men—such as Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul—to communicate his new message, the message of salvation through Jesus Christ. What they wrote became books, or sections, of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>God gave his words to these men in many different ways. Certain writers of the OT received messages directly from God. Moses was given the Ten Commandments inscribed on a stone when he was in God’s presence on Mt Sinai. When David was composing his psalms to God, he received divine inspiration to foretell certain events that would occur 1,000 years later in Jesus Christ’s life. God told his prophets—such as Isaiah and Jeremiah—exactly what to say; therefore, when they gave a message, it was God’s word, not their own. This is why many OT prophets often said, “Thus says the Lord.” (This statement appears over 2,000 times in the OT.) To other prophets, such as Ezekiel and Daniel, God communicated his message through visions and dreams. They recorded exactly what they saw, whether they understood it or not. And other OT writers, such as Samuel and Ezra, were directed by God to record events in the history of Israel.<\/p>\n\n<p>Four hundred years after the last book of the OT (Malachi) was written, God’s Son, Jesus Christ, came to earth. In his talks, he affirmed the divine authorship of the OT writings (see Mt 5:17-19; Lk 16:17; Jn 10:35). Furthermore, he often pointed to certain passages in the OT as having predicted certain events in his life (see Lk 24:27, 44). The NT writers also affirmed the divine inspiration of the OT text. It was the apostle Paul who was directed by God to write, “All Scripture is God-inspired.” Quite specifically, he was speaking of the OT. And, as was already noted, Peter said that the OT prophets were motivated by the Holy Spirit to speak from God.<\/p>\n<p>The NT is also a God-inspired book. Before Jesus left this earth and returned to his Father, he told the disciples that he would send the Holy Spirit to them. He told them that one of the functions of the Holy Spirit would be to remind them of all the things that Jesus had said and then to guide them into more truth (see Jn 14:26; 15:26; 16:13-15). Those who wrote the Gospels were helped by the Holy Spirit to remember Jesus’ exact words, and those who wrote other parts of the NT were guided by the Spirit as they wrote.<\/p>\n<p>The inspiration for writing the Gospels didn’t begin when the authors set pen to papyrus; the inspiration began when the disciples Matthew, Peter (for whom Mark wrote), and John were enlightened by their encounters with Jesus Christ, the Son of God. The apostles’ experiences with him altered their lives forever, imprinting on their souls unforgettable images of the revealed God-man, Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This is what John was speaking of in the prologue to his Gospel when he declared, “The Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory” (1:14, paraphrased). The “we” refers to those eyewitnesses of Jesus’ glory—the apostles who lived with Jesus for over three years. This reminiscence is expanded upon in John’s prologue to his first epistle, where he says “we have heard him, touched him, seen him, and looked upon him” (1 Jn 1:1-2, paraphrased). In both the Gospel and the Epistle, the verbs are in the perfect tense, denoting a past action with a present, abiding effect. Those past encounters with Jesus were never forgotten by John; they lived with him and stayed with him as an inspiring spirit until the day—many years later—he wrote of them in his Gospel. The same could be said for Matthew, who wrote an important Gospel, and Peter, who was really the author behind Mark’s composition. Luke was not an eyewitness, but he based his Gospel on the accounts of those who were (see Lk 1:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>The inspiration for the writing of the Epistles can also be traced to the writers’ encounters with the living Christ. The most prominent epistle writer, Paul, repeatedly claims that his inspiration and subsequent commission came from his encounter with the risen Christ (see, for example, 1 Cor 15:8-10). Peter also claims that his writings were based upon his experiences with the living Christ (see 1 Pt 5:1; 2 Pt 1:16-18). And so does John, who claims to have experienced the God-man visibly, audibly, and palpably (see 1 Jn 1:1-4). James and Jude make no such claim directly, but since they were the brothers of Jesus who became converts when they saw the risen Christ (this is certain for James—see 1 Cor 15:7—and presumed for Jude—see Acts 1:14), they too drew their inspiration from their encounters with the living Christ. Thus, all the epistle writers (with the possible exception of the one who wrote Hebrews, who is unknown) knew the living Christ. This is the relationship that qualified them to write those books that became part of the NT canon. This made them distinct from all others, no matter how good their writings were.<\/p>\n<p>The writers of the NT epistles were inspired by the Spirit when they wrote. Speaking for all the apostles, Paul indicated that the NT apostles were taught by the Holy Spirit what to say. The writers of the NT did not speak with words “taught by human wisdom,” but with “words taught by the Holy Spirit” (see 1 Cor 2:10-13). What they wrote was Spirit-taught. For example, when the apostle John saw that Jesus Christ had come to give eternal life to men, the Spirit helped him express this truth in many different ways. Thus, the reader of John’s Gospel sees different phrases about Jesus giving life: “in him was life,” “a well of living water springing up into eternal life,” “the bread of life,” “the light of life,” “the resurrection and the life,” etc. (see Jn 1:4; 4:14; 6:48; 8:12; 11:25; 14:6). When the apostle Paul contemplated the fullness of Christ’s deity, he was inspired by the Spirit to use such phrasing as “in him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily,” “in him are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge,” and “the unsearchable riches of Christ” (see Col 2:3, 9; Eph 3:8).<\/p>\n<p>As the Spirit taught the writers, they used their own vocabulary and writing style to express the thought of the Spirit. As such, the Scriptures came as the result of divine and human cooperation. The Scriptures were not mechanically inspired—as if God used the men as machines through whom he dictated the divine utterance. Rather, the Scriptures were inspired by God, then written by men. The Bible, therefore, is both fully divine and fully human.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Inspiration of the Theological term for the influence God exerted on the writers of Scripture, enabling them to transmit his revelations in writing. The Bible itself tells us that it is an inspired text. It says, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Tm 3:16, kjv). A translation closer to the original language (Greek) would be, “All Scripture is God-breathed” (niv). This tells us that every word of the Bible was breathed out from God. The words of the Bible came from God a...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Inspiration of the Theological term for the influence God exerted on the writers of Scripture, enabling them to transmit his revelations in writing. The Bible itself tells us that it is an inspired text. It says, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Tm 3:16, kjv). A translation closer to the original language (Greek) would be, “All Scripture is God-breathed” (niv). This tells us that every word of the Bible was breathed out from God. The words of the Bible came from God a...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19661,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","title_en":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66009,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus","title_en":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3> “<span>I Am<\/span>” Sayings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identity of the speaker. As an example from another Gospel, Jesus says in the Sermon on the Mount, “You have heard that it was said . . . but <em>I <\/em>[<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>] say” (see Matt 5:22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44, etc.). The inclusion of the personal pronoun sharpens the contrast between Jesus’ instruction and that of Moses. This remarkable phrase underscores the authority of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>At other times, Jesus’ use of “I am” is grammatically odd, occurring without a predicate. For example, “Before Abraham was even born, <span>I Am<\/span>” (John 8:58). <em>Before Abraham, Jesus was what?<\/em> (cp. 8:28, 59; 13:19). The best explanation of this odd expression comes from the Old Testament. When Moses met the Lord on Mount Sinai, he was eager to discover God’s name (Exod 3:6, 13-14). God tells him that his name is <span>Yhwh<\/span>, four Hebrew letters that express existence. When the Old Testament was later translated into Greek, this name for God was translated as “<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>”—emphatic “<span>I Am<\/span>.” The Greek Old Testament continued to use this title (see Isa 43:25; 51:12; 52:6). Any Jewish reader who knew the Old Testament would understand what Jesus meant when he employed the divine “<span>I Am<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus not only represents God. The “<span>I Am<\/span>” statements demonstrate Jesus’ divine status and showing that he can work, speak, and act in the Father’s stead. He is no mere man. He is the Word of God dwelling in human flesh. His voice is the voice of the Father, and his life is the life of God made visible in human form. The use of the expression “<span>I Am<\/span>” is thus a striking and powerful way to express who Jesus is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 6:35, 48; 8:12, 58; 9:510:7-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1, 5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3> “<span>I Am<\/span>” Sayings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identity of the speaker. As an example from another Gospel, Jesus says in the Sermon on the Mount, “You have heard that it was said . . . but <em>I <\/em>[<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>] say” (see Matt 5:22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44, etc.). The inclusion of the personal pronoun sharpens the contrast between Jesus’ instruction and that of Moses. This remarkable phrase underscores the authority of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>At other times, Jesus’ use of “I am” is grammatically odd, occurring without a predicate. For example, “Before Abraham was even born, <span>I Am<\/span>” (John 8:58). <em>Before Abraham, Jesus was what?<\/em> (cp. 8:28, 59; 13:19). The best explanation of this odd expression comes from the Old Testament. When Moses met the Lord on Mount Sinai, he was eager to discover God’s name (Exod 3:6, 13-14). God tells him that his name is <span>Yhwh<\/span>, four Hebrew letters that express existence. When the Old Testament was later translated into Greek, this name for God was translated as “<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>”—emphatic “<span>I Am<\/span>.” The Greek Old Testament continued to use this title (see Isa 43:25; 51:12; 52:6). Any Jewish reader who knew the Old Testament would understand what Jesus meant when he employed the divine “<span>I Am<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus not only represents God. The “<span>I Am<\/span>” statements demonstrate Jesus’ divine status and showing that he can work, speak, and act in the Father’s stead. He is no mere man. He is the Word of God dwelling in human flesh. His voice is the voice of the Father, and his life is the life of God made visible in human form. The use of the expression “<span>I Am<\/span>” is thus a striking and powerful way to express who Jesus is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 6:35, 48; 8:12, 58; 9:510:7-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1, 5<\/p>","summary_ro":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as egō eimi). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (egō) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identit...","summary_en":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as egō eimi). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (egō) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93635,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus","title_en":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3> “<span>I Am<\/span>” Sayings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identity of the speaker. As an example from another Gospel, Jesus says in the Sermon on the Mount, “You have heard that it was said . . . but <em>I <\/em>[<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>] say” (see Matt 5:22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44, etc.). The inclusion of the personal pronoun sharpens the contrast between Jesus’ instruction and that of Moses. This remarkable phrase underscores the authority of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>At other times, Jesus’ use of “I am” is grammatically odd, occurring without a predicate. For example, “Before Abraham was even born, <span>I Am<\/span>” (John 8:58). <em>Before Abraham, Jesus was what?<\/em> (cp. 8:28, 59; 13:19). The best explanation of this odd expression comes from the Old Testament. When Moses met the Lord on Mount Sinai, he was eager to discover God’s name (Exod 3:6, 13-14). God tells him that his name is <span>Yhwh<\/span>, four Hebrew letters that express existence. When the Old Testament was later translated into Greek, this name for God was translated as “<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>”—emphatic “<span>I Am<\/span>.” The Greek Old Testament continued to use this title (see Isa 43:25; 51:12; 52:6). Any Jewish reader who knew the Old Testament would understand what Jesus meant when he employed the divine “<span>I Am<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus not only represents God. The “<span>I Am<\/span>” statements demonstrate Jesus’ divine status and showing that he can work, speak, and act in the Father’s stead. He is no mere man. He is the Word of God dwelling in human flesh. His voice is the voice of the Father, and his life is the life of God made visible in human form. The use of the expression “<span>I Am<\/span>” is thus a striking and powerful way to express who Jesus is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 6:35, 48; 8:12, 58; 9:510:7-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1, 5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3> “<span>I Am<\/span>” Sayings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identity of the speaker. As an example from another Gospel, Jesus says in the Sermon on the Mount, “You have heard that it was said . . . but <em>I <\/em>[<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>] say” (see Matt 5:22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44, etc.). The inclusion of the personal pronoun sharpens the contrast between Jesus’ instruction and that of Moses. This remarkable phrase underscores the authority of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>At other times, Jesus’ use of “I am” is grammatically odd, occurring without a predicate. For example, “Before Abraham was even born, <span>I Am<\/span>” (John 8:58). <em>Before Abraham, Jesus was what?<\/em> (cp. 8:28, 59; 13:19). The best explanation of this odd expression comes from the Old Testament. When Moses met the Lord on Mount Sinai, he was eager to discover God’s name (Exod 3:6, 13-14). God tells him that his name is <span>Yhwh<\/span>, four Hebrew letters that express existence. When the Old Testament was later translated into Greek, this name for God was translated as “<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>”—emphatic “<span>I Am<\/span>.” The Greek Old Testament continued to use this title (see Isa 43:25; 51:12; 52:6). Any Jewish reader who knew the Old Testament would understand what Jesus meant when he employed the divine “<span>I Am<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus not only represents God. The “<span>I Am<\/span>” statements demonstrate Jesus’ divine status and showing that he can work, speak, and act in the Father’s stead. He is no mere man. He is the Word of God dwelling in human flesh. His voice is the voice of the Father, and his life is the life of God made visible in human form. The use of the expression “<span>I Am<\/span>” is thus a striking and powerful way to express who Jesus is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 6:35, 48; 8:12, 58; 9:510:7-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1, 5<\/p>","summary_ro":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as egō eimi). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (egō) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identit...","summary_en":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as egō eimi). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (egō) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121261,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus","title_en":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3> “<span>I Am<\/span>” Sayings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identity of the speaker. As an example from another Gospel, Jesus says in the Sermon on the Mount, “You have heard that it was said . . . but <em>I <\/em>[<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>] say” (see Matt 5:22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44, etc.). The inclusion of the personal pronoun sharpens the contrast between Jesus’ instruction and that of Moses. This remarkable phrase underscores the authority of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>At other times, Jesus’ use of “I am” is grammatically odd, occurring without a predicate. For example, “Before Abraham was even born, <span>I Am<\/span>” (John 8:58). <em>Before Abraham, Jesus was what?<\/em> (cp. 8:28, 59; 13:19). The best explanation of this odd expression comes from the Old Testament. When Moses met the Lord on Mount Sinai, he was eager to discover God’s name (Exod 3:6, 13-14). God tells him that his name is <span>Yhwh<\/span>, four Hebrew letters that express existence. When the Old Testament was later translated into Greek, this name for God was translated as “<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>”—emphatic “<span>I Am<\/span>.” The Greek Old Testament continued to use this title (see Isa 43:25; 51:12; 52:6). Any Jewish reader who knew the Old Testament would understand what Jesus meant when he employed the divine “<span>I Am<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus not only represents God. The “<span>I Am<\/span>” statements demonstrate Jesus’ divine status and showing that he can work, speak, and act in the Father’s stead. He is no mere man. He is the Word of God dwelling in human flesh. His voice is the voice of the Father, and his life is the life of God made visible in human form. The use of the expression “<span>I Am<\/span>” is thus a striking and powerful way to express who Jesus is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 6:35, 48; 8:12, 58; 9:510:7-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1, 5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3> “<span>I Am<\/span>” Sayings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identity of the speaker. As an example from another Gospel, Jesus says in the Sermon on the Mount, “You have heard that it was said . . . but <em>I <\/em>[<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>] say” (see Matt 5:22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44, etc.). The inclusion of the personal pronoun sharpens the contrast between Jesus’ instruction and that of Moses. This remarkable phrase underscores the authority of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>At other times, Jesus’ use of “I am” is grammatically odd, occurring without a predicate. For example, “Before Abraham was even born, <span>I Am<\/span>” (John 8:58). <em>Before Abraham, Jesus was what?<\/em> (cp. 8:28, 59; 13:19). The best explanation of this odd expression comes from the Old Testament. When Moses met the Lord on Mount Sinai, he was eager to discover God’s name (Exod 3:6, 13-14). God tells him that his name is <span>Yhwh<\/span>, four Hebrew letters that express existence. When the Old Testament was later translated into Greek, this name for God was translated as “<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>”—emphatic “<span>I Am<\/span>.” The Greek Old Testament continued to use this title (see Isa 43:25; 51:12; 52:6). Any Jewish reader who knew the Old Testament would understand what Jesus meant when he employed the divine “<span>I Am<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus not only represents God. The “<span>I Am<\/span>” statements demonstrate Jesus’ divine status and showing that he can work, speak, and act in the Father’s stead. He is no mere man. He is the Word of God dwelling in human flesh. His voice is the voice of the Father, and his life is the life of God made visible in human form. The use of the expression “<span>I Am<\/span>” is thus a striking and powerful way to express who Jesus is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 6:35, 48; 8:12, 58; 9:510:7-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1, 5<\/p>","summary_ro":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as egō eimi). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (egō) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identit...","summary_en":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as egō eimi). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (egō) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148887,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus","title_en":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3> “<span>I Am<\/span>” Sayings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identity of the speaker. As an example from another Gospel, Jesus says in the Sermon on the Mount, “You have heard that it was said . . . but <em>I <\/em>[<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>] say” (see Matt 5:22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44, etc.). The inclusion of the personal pronoun sharpens the contrast between Jesus’ instruction and that of Moses. This remarkable phrase underscores the authority of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>At other times, Jesus’ use of “I am” is grammatically odd, occurring without a predicate. For example, “Before Abraham was even born, <span>I Am<\/span>” (John 8:58). <em>Before Abraham, Jesus was what?<\/em> (cp. 8:28, 59; 13:19). The best explanation of this odd expression comes from the Old Testament. When Moses met the Lord on Mount Sinai, he was eager to discover God’s name (Exod 3:6, 13-14). God tells him that his name is <span>Yhwh<\/span>, four Hebrew letters that express existence. When the Old Testament was later translated into Greek, this name for God was translated as “<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>”—emphatic “<span>I Am<\/span>.” The Greek Old Testament continued to use this title (see Isa 43:25; 51:12; 52:6). Any Jewish reader who knew the Old Testament would understand what Jesus meant when he employed the divine “<span>I Am<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus not only represents God. The “<span>I Am<\/span>” statements demonstrate Jesus’ divine status and showing that he can work, speak, and act in the Father’s stead. He is no mere man. He is the Word of God dwelling in human flesh. His voice is the voice of the Father, and his life is the life of God made visible in human form. The use of the expression “<span>I Am<\/span>” is thus a striking and powerful way to express who Jesus is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 6:35, 48; 8:12, 58; 9:510:7-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1, 5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3> “<span>I Am<\/span>” Sayings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identity of the speaker. As an example from another Gospel, Jesus says in the Sermon on the Mount, “You have heard that it was said . . . but <em>I <\/em>[<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō<\/span>] say” (see Matt 5:22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44, etc.). The inclusion of the personal pronoun sharpens the contrast between Jesus’ instruction and that of Moses. This remarkable phrase underscores the authority of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>At other times, Jesus’ use of “I am” is grammatically odd, occurring without a predicate. For example, “Before Abraham was even born, <span>I Am<\/span>” (John 8:58). <em>Before Abraham, Jesus was what?<\/em> (cp. 8:28, 59; 13:19). The best explanation of this odd expression comes from the Old Testament. When Moses met the Lord on Mount Sinai, he was eager to discover God’s name (Exod 3:6, 13-14). God tells him that his name is <span>Yhwh<\/span>, four Hebrew letters that express existence. When the Old Testament was later translated into Greek, this name for God was translated as “<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">egō eimi<\/span>”—emphatic “<span>I Am<\/span>.” The Greek Old Testament continued to use this title (see Isa 43:25; 51:12; 52:6). Any Jewish reader who knew the Old Testament would understand what Jesus meant when he employed the divine “<span>I Am<\/span>.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus not only represents God. The “<span>I Am<\/span>” statements demonstrate Jesus’ divine status and showing that he can work, speak, and act in the Father’s stead. He is no mere man. He is the Word of God dwelling in human flesh. His voice is the voice of the Father, and his life is the life of God made visible in human form. The use of the expression “<span>I Am<\/span>” is thus a striking and powerful way to express who Jesus is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>John 6:35, 48; 8:12, 58; 9:510:7-14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1, 5<\/p>","summary_ro":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as egō eimi). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (egō) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identit...","summary_en":"“I Am” Sayings of Jesus Numerous times in the Gospel of John, Jesus uses the expression “I am” (rendered in Greek as egō eimi). Sometimes it comes as a simple self-description such as “I am the bread of life.” John has seven of these statements that have “I am” followed by a predicate (6:35; 8:12; 10:9, 11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1). One thing important to note is that Greek does not require the use of the pronoun “I” (egō) in these sentences. Thus, the presence of the pronoun emphasizes the identit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"49":[{"id":56449,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:49","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:49","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:49-50<\/strong> Jesus connected the <em>manna<\/em> of the Exodus with himself, then pointed out a major difference: The Israelites remained mortal and <em>they all died<\/em><em>,<\/em> whereas <em>the bread from heaven<\/em> (Jesus himself) provides eternal life (6:47, 51, 58).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:49-50<\/strong> Jesus connected the <em>manna<\/em> of the Exodus with himself, then pointed out a major difference: The Israelites remained mortal and <em>they all died<\/em><em>,<\/em> whereas <em>the bread from heaven<\/em> (Jesus himself) provides eternal life (6:47, 51, 58).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:49-50 Jesus connected the manna of the Exodus with himself, then pointed out a major difference: The Israelites remained mortal and they all died, whereas the bread from heaven (Jesus himself) provides eternal life (6:47, 51, 58).","summary_en":"6:49-50 Jesus connected the manna of the Exodus with himself, then pointed out a major difference: The Israelites remained mortal and they all died, whereas the bread from heaven (Jesus himself) provides eternal life (6:47, 51, 58).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84075,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:49","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:49","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:49-50<\/strong> Jesus connected the <em>manna<\/em> of the Exodus with himself, then pointed out a major difference: The Israelites remained mortal and <em>they all died<\/em><em>,<\/em> whereas <em>the bread from heaven<\/em> (Jesus himself) provides eternal life (6:47, 51, 58).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:49-50<\/strong> Jesus connected the <em>manna<\/em> of the Exodus with himself, then pointed out a major difference: The Israelites remained mortal and <em>they all died<\/em><em>,<\/em> whereas <em>the bread from heaven<\/em> (Jesus himself) provides eternal life (6:47, 51, 58).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:49-50 Jesus connected the manna of the Exodus with himself, then pointed out a major difference: The Israelites remained mortal and they all died, whereas the bread from heaven (Jesus himself) provides eternal life (6:47, 51, 58).","summary_en":"6:49-50 Jesus connected the manna of the Exodus with himself, then pointed out a major difference: The Israelites remained mortal and they all died, whereas the bread from heaven (Jesus himself) provides eternal life (6:47, 51, 58).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111701,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:49","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:49","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:49-50<\/strong> Jesus connected the <em>manna<\/em> of the Exodus with himself, then pointed out a major difference: The Israelites remained mortal and <em>they all died<\/em><em>,<\/em> whereas <em>the bread from heaven<\/em> (Jesus himself) provides eternal life (6:47, 51, 58).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:49-50<\/strong> Jesus connected the <em>manna<\/em> of the Exodus with himself, then pointed out a major difference: The Israelites remained mortal and <em>they all died<\/em><em>,<\/em> whereas <em>the bread from heaven<\/em> (Jesus himself) provides eternal life (6:47, 51, 58).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:49-50 Jesus connected the manna of the Exodus with himself, then pointed out a major difference: The Israelites remained mortal and they all died, whereas the bread from heaven (Jesus himself) provides eternal life (6:47, 51, 58).","summary_en":"6:49-50 Jesus connected the manna of the Exodus with himself, then pointed out a major difference: The Israelites remained mortal and they all died, whereas the bread from heaven (Jesus himself) provides eternal life (6:47, 51, 58).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139327,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:49","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:49","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:49-50<\/strong> Jesus connected the <em>manna<\/em> of the Exodus with himself, then pointed out a major difference: The Israelites remained mortal and <em>they all died<\/em><em>,<\/em> whereas <em>the bread from heaven<\/em> (Jesus himself) provides eternal life (6:47, 51, 58).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:49-50<\/strong> Jesus connected the <em>manna<\/em> of the Exodus with himself, then pointed out a major difference: The Israelites remained mortal and <em>they all died<\/em><em>,<\/em> whereas <em>the bread from heaven<\/em> (Jesus himself) provides eternal life (6:47, 51, 58).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:49-50 Jesus connected the manna of the Exodus with himself, then pointed out a major difference: The Israelites remained mortal and they all died, whereas the bread from heaven (Jesus himself) provides eternal life (6:47, 51, 58).","summary_en":"6:49-50 Jesus connected the manna of the Exodus with himself, then pointed out a major difference: The Israelites remained mortal and they all died, whereas the bread from heaven (Jesus himself) provides eternal life (6:47, 51, 58).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"50":[{"id":20215,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of John","title_en":"Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","summary_en":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60604,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88230,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115856,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143482,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"51":[{"id":11331,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of Christ*, Exaltation","title_en":"of Christ*, Exaltation","content_ro":"<h3>EXALTATION OF CHRIST*<\/h3>\n<p>The glory and dominion which Jesus attained subsequent to the completion of his earthly work of suffering and death. It is at one and the same time the consummation of his redemptive sacrifice and the reward of his full obedience to the will of the Father. The exaltation thus includes the biblical doctrines of Jesus’ resurrection, ascension, and heavenly enthronement.<\/p>\n<p>During his earthly ministry, Jesus predicted not only that he would suffer, die, and be buried (Mt 20:28; Jn 3:14; 6:51; 10:11; etc.) but also that he would thereafter be exalted by the power of the Father to heavenly dominion and glory (Lk 24:26; Jn 17:5). This humiliation-exaltation pattern was plainly indicated by Jesus on the occasion of his encounter with a delegation of proselytes who sought to meet with the Lord (Jn 12:20-36). Jesus far exceeded the expectations of these Greeks by declaring that fellowship with his Father would be extended to the Gentiles in consequence of his imminent passion and resurrection. By affirming, “The hour has come for the Son of man to be glorified” (Jn 12:23, <span>rsv<\/span>), Jesus indicated that he would be endowed with honor and splendor at his exaltation to the presence of the Father in heaven. Jesus’ teaching in respect to his exaltation to heaven provided the foundation for the church’s more explicit teaching on the subject.<\/p>\n<p>The resurrection, the initial event in the exaltation of Jesus, is one of the central affirmations of NT teaching (Acts 2:24, 32; 3:15; 4:10; Rom 1:4; 1 Cor 15:4). From apostolic times Christians have consistently affirmed that at a particular moment in time and in a given place its founder literally passed from a state of death to a state of endless life. The absolute uniqueness of Christ’s exaltation via bodily resurrection from the dead sets Christianity in a class by itself among the religions of the world. A reading of the NT plainly indicates that Jesus openly predicted that death was unable to defeat him. To the skeptical Jews who demanded from Jesus a sign of the authority by which he purged the temple, the Lord answered: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (Jn 2:19, <span>rsv<\/span>). After Peter’s crucial confession of Christ’s divine sonship at Caesarea Philippi, Jesus gave to his followers a more detailed account of the divine plan whereby he would be raised from the dead on the third day (Mt 16:21). To the disciples who assembled in Galilee shortly after his transfiguration, Jesus spoke plainly of his forthcoming exaltation: “The Son of man is to be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill him, and he will be raised on the third day” (17:22-23, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the NT, the apostolic teaching about Christ’s death is almost always accompanied by an emphasis upon the certainty of his physical resurrection after three days.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, the NT writers were careful to spell out the profound theological significance of Christ’s exaltation in resurrection: (1) it demonstrates Christ’s certain power over death and the grave (Acts 2:24; 1 Cor 15:54-56); (2) it confirms the validity of Christ’s teachings, particularly his claims to divine Sonship (Acts 2:36; Rom 1:4); (3) it represents God’s ultimate vindication of his obedient, suffering servant (Phil 2:8-9); (4) it is the means of the justification (Rom 4:25) and regeneration (1 Pt 1:3) of the believer; and (5) it is the guarantee of the future resurrection of the Christian (Rom 6:5; 1 Cor 15:22-24). The effective cause of Christ’s resurrection is declared to be, on one hand, God (Ps 16:10; Acts 2:32; Eph 1:19-20) and, on the other hand, our Lord himself (Jn 2:19; 10:17-18).<\/p>\n<p>The ascension represents the second phase of the exaltation of Christ. According to the two NT historical accounts (Lk 24:50-51; Acts 1:9-11), 40 days after his death Jesus left his disciples for the last time and ascended into heaven. Jesus, who several times in John’s Gospel specifically refers to his ascension (Jn 3:13; 6:62; 14:12; 20:17), regarded the place to which he would depart as an actual locality in the heavenly realm (14:2). In his reflection upon this second stage of the exaltation intimated by Psalm 68:18, the apostle Paul associates the ascension with Christ’s triumph over his foes and the bestowal of spiritual gifts to the church (Eph 4:8). The victor triumphantly returned to his Father’s throne in order to bless his people. In what may be part of an early Christian hymn, Paul explicates what he regards as the supreme “mystery” of the Christian faith, namely, that Christ Jesus who “was manifested in the flesh” was at the close of his life “taken up into glory” (1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Alone among the writings of the NT, the Epistle to the Hebrews associates Christ’s ascension with his high priestly ministry in the heavenly sanctuary. He who steadfastly withstood every earthly trial, having “passed through the heavens,” is fully able to empathize with his people and impart grace to the tempted and distraught (Heb 4:14ff.). Employing the symbolism of the ancient Hebrew sanctuary, the writer conceptualizes the Ascension as the event whereby Christ enters into the inner shrine behind the curtain (6:19), bringing with him his own blood (9:12), to the end that he might appear in the presence of God on our behalf (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The NT thus attributes considerable theological significance to this phase of Christ’s exaltation. By virtue of his exaltation to the Father, Christ (1) demonstrated his defeat of every earthly enemy (Eph 4:8); (2) sent the promised Holy Spirit (Jn 16:7; Acts 2:33), which awaited his glorification (Jn 7:39); and (3) formally undertook his heavenly priestly ministry (Heb 6:20).<\/p>\n<p>The third stage of Christ’s exaltation is his heavenly enthronement at the right hand of the Father. Following his passion, death, resurrection, and ascension to the heavenly realm, Christ is represented in Scripture as having taken his seat at the Father’s right hand. The biblical phrase “right hand of God” (Acts 7:55-56), which has been preserved in many later Christian creeds and confessions, is an anthropomorphism that figuratively describes Christ’s universal dominion, authority, and power in the presence of the Father. This aspect of Christ’s exaltation represents the fulfillment of his prayer recorded in John 17:5: “Now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory I had with you before the world was made.”<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the description of God seated on the throne of the universe is a sign of his sovereignty (1 Kgs 22:19; Ps 99:1), majesty (Is 6:1-4) and holiness (Ps 47:8). That one should be invited to take a seat on the right hand of the sovereign in Eastern cultures was a token of extraordinary honor and authority (1 Kgs 2:19). The fact that the exalted Christ would be accorded this particular privilege was anticipated in the Scriptures of the OT (see Ps 8:5, quoted in Heb 2:8; and see Ps 110:1).<\/p>\n<p>The Epistle to the Hebrews, which shows unusual interest in the doctrine of Christ’s exaltation, represents Christ’s heavenly enthronement both as the sequel to his completed earthly sacrifice and as the commencement of his High Priestly ministration in the sanctuary on high. Affirming the superiority of Christ as High Priest of the new covenant, Hebrews 8:1-2 portrays Christ as seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, a minister in the heavenlies. Christ’s enthronement affirms not only the finality of his earthly work of self-sacrifice but also his newly acquired status as mediator of the new and better covenant. Hebrews 10:11-18 pointedly contrasts the ineffectual sacrifices of the legal priests who <em>stand<\/em> in the performance of their ritual sacrifices with the effectual single sacrifice of Christ, who is now <em>seated<\/em> at the right hand of God as intercessor for the saints.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EXALTATION OF CHRIST*<\/h3>\n<p>The glory and dominion which Jesus attained subsequent to the completion of his earthly work of suffering and death. It is at one and the same time the consummation of his redemptive sacrifice and the reward of his full obedience to the will of the Father. The exaltation thus includes the biblical doctrines of Jesus’ resurrection, ascension, and heavenly enthronement.<\/p>\n<p>During his earthly ministry, Jesus predicted not only that he would suffer, die, and be buried (Mt 20:28; Jn 3:14; 6:51; 10:11; etc.) but also that he would thereafter be exalted by the power of the Father to heavenly dominion and glory (Lk 24:26; Jn 17:5). This humiliation-exaltation pattern was plainly indicated by Jesus on the occasion of his encounter with a delegation of proselytes who sought to meet with the Lord (Jn 12:20-36). Jesus far exceeded the expectations of these Greeks by declaring that fellowship with his Father would be extended to the Gentiles in consequence of his imminent passion and resurrection. By affirming, “The hour has come for the Son of man to be glorified” (Jn 12:23, <span>rsv<\/span>), Jesus indicated that he would be endowed with honor and splendor at his exaltation to the presence of the Father in heaven. Jesus’ teaching in respect to his exaltation to heaven provided the foundation for the church’s more explicit teaching on the subject.<\/p>\n<p>The resurrection, the initial event in the exaltation of Jesus, is one of the central affirmations of NT teaching (Acts 2:24, 32; 3:15; 4:10; Rom 1:4; 1 Cor 15:4). From apostolic times Christians have consistently affirmed that at a particular moment in time and in a given place its founder literally passed from a state of death to a state of endless life. The absolute uniqueness of Christ’s exaltation via bodily resurrection from the dead sets Christianity in a class by itself among the religions of the world. A reading of the NT plainly indicates that Jesus openly predicted that death was unable to defeat him. To the skeptical Jews who demanded from Jesus a sign of the authority by which he purged the temple, the Lord answered: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (Jn 2:19, <span>rsv<\/span>). After Peter’s crucial confession of Christ’s divine sonship at Caesarea Philippi, Jesus gave to his followers a more detailed account of the divine plan whereby he would be raised from the dead on the third day (Mt 16:21). To the disciples who assembled in Galilee shortly after his transfiguration, Jesus spoke plainly of his forthcoming exaltation: “The Son of man is to be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill him, and he will be raised on the third day” (17:22-23, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the NT, the apostolic teaching about Christ’s death is almost always accompanied by an emphasis upon the certainty of his physical resurrection after three days.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, the NT writers were careful to spell out the profound theological significance of Christ’s exaltation in resurrection: (1) it demonstrates Christ’s certain power over death and the grave (Acts 2:24; 1 Cor 15:54-56); (2) it confirms the validity of Christ’s teachings, particularly his claims to divine Sonship (Acts 2:36; Rom 1:4); (3) it represents God’s ultimate vindication of his obedient, suffering servant (Phil 2:8-9); (4) it is the means of the justification (Rom 4:25) and regeneration (1 Pt 1:3) of the believer; and (5) it is the guarantee of the future resurrection of the Christian (Rom 6:5; 1 Cor 15:22-24). The effective cause of Christ’s resurrection is declared to be, on one hand, God (Ps 16:10; Acts 2:32; Eph 1:19-20) and, on the other hand, our Lord himself (Jn 2:19; 10:17-18).<\/p>\n<p>The ascension represents the second phase of the exaltation of Christ. According to the two NT historical accounts (Lk 24:50-51; Acts 1:9-11), 40 days after his death Jesus left his disciples for the last time and ascended into heaven. Jesus, who several times in John’s Gospel specifically refers to his ascension (Jn 3:13; 6:62; 14:12; 20:17), regarded the place to which he would depart as an actual locality in the heavenly realm (14:2). In his reflection upon this second stage of the exaltation intimated by Psalm 68:18, the apostle Paul associates the ascension with Christ’s triumph over his foes and the bestowal of spiritual gifts to the church (Eph 4:8). The victor triumphantly returned to his Father’s throne in order to bless his people. In what may be part of an early Christian hymn, Paul explicates what he regards as the supreme “mystery” of the Christian faith, namely, that Christ Jesus who “was manifested in the flesh” was at the close of his life “taken up into glory” (1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Alone among the writings of the NT, the Epistle to the Hebrews associates Christ’s ascension with his high priestly ministry in the heavenly sanctuary. He who steadfastly withstood every earthly trial, having “passed through the heavens,” is fully able to empathize with his people and impart grace to the tempted and distraught (Heb 4:14ff.). Employing the symbolism of the ancient Hebrew sanctuary, the writer conceptualizes the Ascension as the event whereby Christ enters into the inner shrine behind the curtain (6:19), bringing with him his own blood (9:12), to the end that he might appear in the presence of God on our behalf (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The NT thus attributes considerable theological significance to this phase of Christ’s exaltation. By virtue of his exaltation to the Father, Christ (1) demonstrated his defeat of every earthly enemy (Eph 4:8); (2) sent the promised Holy Spirit (Jn 16:7; Acts 2:33), which awaited his glorification (Jn 7:39); and (3) formally undertook his heavenly priestly ministry (Heb 6:20).<\/p>\n<p>The third stage of Christ’s exaltation is his heavenly enthronement at the right hand of the Father. Following his passion, death, resurrection, and ascension to the heavenly realm, Christ is represented in Scripture as having taken his seat at the Father’s right hand. The biblical phrase “right hand of God” (Acts 7:55-56), which has been preserved in many later Christian creeds and confessions, is an anthropomorphism that figuratively describes Christ’s universal dominion, authority, and power in the presence of the Father. This aspect of Christ’s exaltation represents the fulfillment of his prayer recorded in John 17:5: “Now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory I had with you before the world was made.”<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the description of God seated on the throne of the universe is a sign of his sovereignty (1 Kgs 22:19; Ps 99:1), majesty (Is 6:1-4) and holiness (Ps 47:8). That one should be invited to take a seat on the right hand of the sovereign in Eastern cultures was a token of extraordinary honor and authority (1 Kgs 2:19). The fact that the exalted Christ would be accorded this particular privilege was anticipated in the Scriptures of the OT (see Ps 8:5, quoted in Heb 2:8; and see Ps 110:1).<\/p>\n<p>The Epistle to the Hebrews, which shows unusual interest in the doctrine of Christ’s exaltation, represents Christ’s heavenly enthronement both as the sequel to his completed earthly sacrifice and as the commencement of his High Priestly ministration in the sanctuary on high. Affirming the superiority of Christ as High Priest of the new covenant, Hebrews 8:1-2 portrays Christ as seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, a minister in the heavenlies. Christ’s enthronement affirms not only the finality of his earthly work of self-sacrifice but also his newly acquired status as mediator of the new and better covenant. Hebrews 10:11-18 pointedly contrasts the ineffectual sacrifices of the legal priests who <em>stand<\/em> in the performance of their ritual sacrifices with the effectual single sacrifice of Christ, who is now <em>seated<\/em> at the right hand of God as intercessor for the saints.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EXALTATION OF CHRIST* The glory and dominion which Jesus attained subsequent to the completion of his earthly work of suffering and death. It is at one and the same time the consummation of his redemptive sacrifice and the reward of his full obedience to the will of the Father. The exaltation thus includes the biblical doctrines of Jesus’ resurrection, ascension, and heavenly enthronement. During his earthly ministry, Jesus predicted not only that he would suffer, die, and be buried (Mt 20:28...","summary_en":"EXALTATION OF CHRIST* The glory and dominion which Jesus attained subsequent to the completion of his earthly work of suffering and death. It is at one and the same time the consummation of his redemptive sacrifice and the reward of his full obedience to the will of the Father. The exaltation thus includes the biblical doctrines of Jesus’ resurrection, ascension, and heavenly enthronement. During his earthly ministry, Jesus predicted not only that he would suffer, die, and be buried (Mt 20:28...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19502,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35339,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sign","title_en":"Sign","content_ro":"<h3>SIGN<\/h3>\n<p>Word connoting a visible event intended to convey meaning beyond that which is normally perceived in the outward appearance of the event.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In a few instances in the OT, “sign” refers to the observances of heavenly bodies in an astrological sense (Gn 1:14; Jer 10:2), or to the “signs and wonders” as marks of the miraculous actions of God within the history of the world (Dt 4:34; 6:22; Neh 9:10; Ps 105:27; Jer 32:20). On other occasions, it is used as an insignia of the Mosaic covenant. Thus, the wearing of the law on the wrist and forehead and the keeping of the Sabbath are considered signs of the relationship between Israel and God (Dt 6:8; 11:18; Ez 20:12, 20).<\/p>\n<p>The most numerous and significant usages of “sign” appear in relation to the OT prophetic ministry. Beginning with Moses, signs are used to confirm that God has spoken to the prophet. Thus, when Moses received the message of deliverance that he was to bring to the children of Israel in Egypt and the pharaoh, he was given two signs: his staff was changed into a serpent and his hand was afflicted with leprosy (Ex 4:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Signs and wonders were also used by false prophets. After a sign had been given and had come to pass, the leaders of Israel were to examine the message of the prophet to see if it led the people away from the true worship of God. If it did, the prophet who had given the sign was to be put to death (Dt 13:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The character of the sign varies and often is miraculous. Some of the great miracles of the OT are prophetic signs—for example, the moving of the shadow back up the steps of Hezekiah’s palace to confirm Isaiah’s prediction that the king would recover from what was a mortal illness (2 Kgs 20:8-9; Is 38:21-22). Often the sign is predictive only, and the people can know whether the prophet has spoken the truth by whether or not the event comes to pass—for example, the prophet’s foretelling the death of both of Eli’s sons on the same day (1 Sm 2:34; see also 14:10; 2 Kgs 19:29; Is 37:30). Sometimes the sign was carefully timed, and the recipient was told that the appearance of the sign would show when to act to fulfill the prophetic message (1 Sm 10:7-9). At other times, the events predicted were acted out in the life of the prophet. These symbolic actions demonstrated the truth of the prophet’s message—for example, Isaiah’s nakedness for three years to demonstrate the fate of those who preached trust in Egypt’s power (Is 20:3; see also Ez 4:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT occurrences are much like those in the OT. There are references to heavenly signs that will occur as indications of the end of time, and those with special knowledge will understand that the end is drawing near (Mt 24:3, 30; Mk 13:4, 22; Lk 21:11, 25-26). These apocalyptic signs have no astrological connotations as in the OT. There is also mention of the sign as the seal of the covenant between God and Israel in reference to circumcision in Romans 4:11.<\/p>\n<p>As in the OT, the NT uses of signs are confirmations of the message given by God, and this message comes through the apostolic community to the church. Thus, there is great emphasis on the way God confirms the message of the apostles through their ability to perform signs and wonders (Acts 2:43; 4:30; 5:12; 8:13; 14:3; Rom 15:19; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Jesus’ miracles are not called signs. Only in Acts 2:22 does Peter proclaim that Jesus’ message was attested by signs he performed. Rather, Jesus’ miracles are seen as acts of divine power and mercy. When the Jews ask for a sign, they are consistently refused, with the promise that the only sign they will receive is the sign of Jonah (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1; Mk 8:11-12; Lk 11:19, 30), a sign that refers to the death and resurrection of the Christ. As Jonah was in the belly of the whale for three days and three nights, so will the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth for three days (Mt 12:40).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, however, the miracles of Jesus are seen in a strikingly different light and are considered signs. Beginning with the changing of water into wine (Jn 2:1-11), the miracles are called signs and are intended to lead those who see them to faith (v 23). Jesus even laments that the people will not believe unless they see signs (4:48). John’s purpose in writing his Gospel is to present the signs of Jesus so that those who come to faith may do so through seeing these signs (20:30). The signs in the Gospel are expressly chosen because they lend themselves to the development of true faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the miracles of Jesus confirm the teaching of Jesus. In the synoptic Gospels, the miracles are seen as acts of mercy and divine power. In John they are carefully selected to demonstrate what Jesus has to tell the world about himself. In this respect, they are a bit like the symbolic actions of Isaiah and Ezekiel in that the action of the speaker dramatizes the message. After Jesus feeds the 5,000 with the five loaves of bread and the two fishes, he announces in the synagogue at Capernaum, “I am the bread of life which came down from heaven” (Jn 6:51). He tells them not to labor for the bread of this world that perishes. In much the same way, the healing of the man born blind is bound up with Jesus’ teaching that he is the light of the world (9:5). The resurrection of Lazarus prepares the way for Jesus to proclaim that he is the resurrection and the life (11:25). In John’s Gospel the signs are not only a demonstration of divine power but also a revelation of Jesus’ divine character. In addition to confirming his divine message, they also proclaim his personhood and mission.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Miracle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SIGN<\/h3>\n<p>Word connoting a visible event intended to convey meaning beyond that which is normally perceived in the outward appearance of the event.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In a few instances in the OT, “sign” refers to the observances of heavenly bodies in an astrological sense (Gn 1:14; Jer 10:2), or to the “signs and wonders” as marks of the miraculous actions of God within the history of the world (Dt 4:34; 6:22; Neh 9:10; Ps 105:27; Jer 32:20). On other occasions, it is used as an insignia of the Mosaic covenant. Thus, the wearing of the law on the wrist and forehead and the keeping of the Sabbath are considered signs of the relationship between Israel and God (Dt 6:8; 11:18; Ez 20:12, 20).<\/p>\n<p>The most numerous and significant usages of “sign” appear in relation to the OT prophetic ministry. Beginning with Moses, signs are used to confirm that God has spoken to the prophet. Thus, when Moses received the message of deliverance that he was to bring to the children of Israel in Egypt and the pharaoh, he was given two signs: his staff was changed into a serpent and his hand was afflicted with leprosy (Ex 4:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Signs and wonders were also used by false prophets. After a sign had been given and had come to pass, the leaders of Israel were to examine the message of the prophet to see if it led the people away from the true worship of God. If it did, the prophet who had given the sign was to be put to death (Dt 13:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The character of the sign varies and often is miraculous. Some of the great miracles of the OT are prophetic signs—for example, the moving of the shadow back up the steps of Hezekiah’s palace to confirm Isaiah’s prediction that the king would recover from what was a mortal illness (2 Kgs 20:8-9; Is 38:21-22). Often the sign is predictive only, and the people can know whether the prophet has spoken the truth by whether or not the event comes to pass—for example, the prophet’s foretelling the death of both of Eli’s sons on the same day (1 Sm 2:34; see also 14:10; 2 Kgs 19:29; Is 37:30). Sometimes the sign was carefully timed, and the recipient was told that the appearance of the sign would show when to act to fulfill the prophetic message (1 Sm 10:7-9). At other times, the events predicted were acted out in the life of the prophet. These symbolic actions demonstrated the truth of the prophet’s message—for example, Isaiah’s nakedness for three years to demonstrate the fate of those who preached trust in Egypt’s power (Is 20:3; see also Ez 4:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT occurrences are much like those in the OT. There are references to heavenly signs that will occur as indications of the end of time, and those with special knowledge will understand that the end is drawing near (Mt 24:3, 30; Mk 13:4, 22; Lk 21:11, 25-26). These apocalyptic signs have no astrological connotations as in the OT. There is also mention of the sign as the seal of the covenant between God and Israel in reference to circumcision in Romans 4:11.<\/p>\n<p>As in the OT, the NT uses of signs are confirmations of the message given by God, and this message comes through the apostolic community to the church. Thus, there is great emphasis on the way God confirms the message of the apostles through their ability to perform signs and wonders (Acts 2:43; 4:30; 5:12; 8:13; 14:3; Rom 15:19; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Jesus’ miracles are not called signs. Only in Acts 2:22 does Peter proclaim that Jesus’ message was attested by signs he performed. Rather, Jesus’ miracles are seen as acts of divine power and mercy. When the Jews ask for a sign, they are consistently refused, with the promise that the only sign they will receive is the sign of Jonah (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1; Mk 8:11-12; Lk 11:19, 30), a sign that refers to the death and resurrection of the Christ. As Jonah was in the belly of the whale for three days and three nights, so will the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth for three days (Mt 12:40).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, however, the miracles of Jesus are seen in a strikingly different light and are considered signs. Beginning with the changing of water into wine (Jn 2:1-11), the miracles are called signs and are intended to lead those who see them to faith (v 23). Jesus even laments that the people will not believe unless they see signs (4:48). John’s purpose in writing his Gospel is to present the signs of Jesus so that those who come to faith may do so through seeing these signs (20:30). The signs in the Gospel are expressly chosen because they lend themselves to the development of true faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the miracles of Jesus confirm the teaching of Jesus. In the synoptic Gospels, the miracles are seen as acts of mercy and divine power. In John they are carefully selected to demonstrate what Jesus has to tell the world about himself. In this respect, they are a bit like the symbolic actions of Isaiah and Ezekiel in that the action of the speaker dramatizes the message. After Jesus feeds the 5,000 with the five loaves of bread and the two fishes, he announces in the synagogue at Capernaum, “I am the bread of life which came down from heaven” (Jn 6:51). He tells them not to labor for the bread of this world that perishes. In much the same way, the healing of the man born blind is bound up with Jesus’ teaching that he is the light of the world (9:5). The resurrection of Lazarus prepares the way for Jesus to proclaim that he is the resurrection and the life (11:25). In John’s Gospel the signs are not only a demonstration of divine power but also a revelation of Jesus’ divine character. In addition to confirming his divine message, they also proclaim his personhood and mission.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Miracle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SIGN Word connoting a visible event intended to convey meaning beyond that which is normally perceived in the outward appearance of the event. In the Old Testament In a few instances in the OT, “sign” refers to the observances of heavenly bodies in an astrological sense (Gn 1:14; Jer 10:2), or to the “signs and wonders” as marks of the miraculous actions of God within the history of the world (Dt 4:34; 6:22; Neh 9:10; Ps 105:27; Jer 32:20). On other occasions, it is used as an insignia of the...","summary_en":"SIGN Word connoting a visible event intended to convey meaning beyond that which is normally perceived in the outward appearance of the event. In the Old Testament In a few instances in the OT, “sign” refers to the observances of heavenly bodies in an astrological sense (Gn 1:14; Jer 10:2), or to the “signs and wonders” as marks of the miraculous actions of God within the history of the world (Dt 4:34; 6:22; Neh 9:10; Ps 105:27; Jer 32:20). On other occasions, it is used as an insignia of the...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56450,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:51","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:51","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:51<\/strong> <em>this bread . . . is my flesh:<\/em> The gift that brings life is now unveiled. On the cross, Jesus offered his flesh for the life of the world.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:51<\/strong> <em>this bread . . . is my flesh:<\/em> The gift that brings life is now unveiled. On the cross, Jesus offered his flesh for the life of the world.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:51 this bread . . . is my flesh: The gift that brings life is now unveiled. On the cross, Jesus offered his flesh for the life of the world.","summary_en":"6:51 this bread . . . is my flesh: The gift that brings life is now unveiled. On the cross, Jesus offered his flesh for the life of the world.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84076,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:51","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:51","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:51<\/strong> <em>this bread . . . is my flesh:<\/em> The gift that brings life is now unveiled. On the cross, Jesus offered his flesh for the life of the world.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:51<\/strong> <em>this bread . . . is my flesh:<\/em> The gift that brings life is now unveiled. On the cross, Jesus offered his flesh for the life of the world.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:51 this bread . . . is my flesh: The gift that brings life is now unveiled. On the cross, Jesus offered his flesh for the life of the world.","summary_en":"6:51 this bread . . . is my flesh: The gift that brings life is now unveiled. On the cross, Jesus offered his flesh for the life of the world.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111702,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:51","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:51","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:51<\/strong> <em>this bread . . . is my flesh:<\/em> The gift that brings life is now unveiled. On the cross, Jesus offered his flesh for the life of the world.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:51<\/strong> <em>this bread . . . is my flesh:<\/em> The gift that brings life is now unveiled. On the cross, Jesus offered his flesh for the life of the world.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:51 this bread . . . is my flesh: The gift that brings life is now unveiled. On the cross, Jesus offered his flesh for the life of the world.","summary_en":"6:51 this bread . . . is my flesh: The gift that brings life is now unveiled. On the cross, Jesus offered his flesh for the life of the world.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139328,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:51","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:51","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:51<\/strong> <em>this bread . . . is my flesh:<\/em> The gift that brings life is now unveiled. On the cross, Jesus offered his flesh for the life of the world.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:51<\/strong> <em>this bread . . . is my flesh:<\/em> The gift that brings life is now unveiled. On the cross, Jesus offered his flesh for the life of the world.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:51 this bread . . . is my flesh: The gift that brings life is now unveiled. On the cross, Jesus offered his flesh for the life of the world.","summary_en":"6:51 this bread . . . is my flesh: The gift that brings life is now unveiled. On the cross, Jesus offered his flesh for the life of the world.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65826,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66047,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93452,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93673,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121078,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121299,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148704,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","title_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John<\/h3>\n<p>The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>John, however, does not use the popular term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span> in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sēmeion<\/span>), an event that has a deeper meaning. John also describes Jesus’ miracles as “works” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">erga<\/span>, see John 10:38; see also 7:3, translated “miracles”; 9:3, translated “power”). Christ’s miracles were part of the work that God gave him to do (17:4), revealing the Father to the world.<\/p>\n<p>John selectively records seven miraculous signs that occurred during Jesus’ ministry: (1) changing water to wine (2:1-11); (2) healing an official’s son (4:46-54); (3) healing a paralyzed man (5:1-17); (4) feeding five thousand (6:1-15); (5) walking on water (6:16-21); (6) healing a blind man (9:1-41); and (7) raising Lazarus from the dead (11:1-44). John also records a miraculous catch of fish after Jesus’ resurrection (21:4-14). Most of the seven signs were met with belief (2:11; 4:53; 11:45-48). However, Jesus’ purposes extended beyond the signs themselves. The miraculous signs are like physical roadsigns: They are messages that point to a greater reality. Thus, a miraculous sign is usually accompanied by a discourse from Jesus in which he explains the truth that the sign points to. For example, Jesus fed the five thousand not just to meet their needs but also so that people would see him as the bread of life (6:35), given for them when he died on the cross (6:51).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:8-31; 7:3; Num 14:11, 22; Deut 4:34; Pss 74:9; 78:43; Matt 12:38-39; John 2:1-11, 18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2, 14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 15:24; 20:30; Acts 2:43; 4:16, 22, 30; 5:12; 8:6; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","summary_en":"Miraculous Signs in the Gospel of John The Gospels use three words to describe Jesus’ miraculous works. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Greek word dunamis (“power”) describes an act of raw force that amazes observers and leads to the inevitable conclusion that God must be at work in Jesus (see Mark 6:2). John, however, does not use the popular term dunamis in relation to Jesus’ miracles. Instead, he labels each of Jesus’ miracles as a “sign” (Greek sēmeion), an event that has a deeper meaning...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148925,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The World","title_en":"The World","content_ro":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The World<\/h3>\n<p>One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span>). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19). The world is dead and needs life (6:33, 51), yet it hates the one who can save it (7:7). The world is under the dominion of Satan (12:31), who will one day be judged.<\/p>\n<p>God loves the world of humanity, despite its hostility and rebellion against him. Jesus died to take away the sin of the world (1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Jn 2:2). But God’s love for the world he created stands alongside his necessary judgment of the world (John 3:18-21, 36; 5:27-30; 12:47-48). Christ’s followers experience this same tension in their mission. We are called into the world to bring the message of God’s love, but we will experience conflict because the world will be hostile to our message (see 15:18-27; 17:13-26).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 6:11-12; Pss 2:1-6; 9:8; Isa 61:11; 66:16; Matt 5:14; 13:38-40; John 1:9-10; 3:16-19; 7:7; 8:12; 14:17-19; 15:18-19; 16:7-9, 33; John 17:5-26; Acts 17:31; 1 Cor 1:20-28; 3:3; 6:2; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:2; Col 2:20; Jas 4:4; 2 Pet 1:4; 2:20; 1 Jn 2:15-16; 4:3-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","summary_en":"The World One of the most frequently used words in John is “world” (Greek kosmos). In Greek-speaking Jewish thought, kosmos refers to the heavens and the earth as created by God (Gen 1; see also John 1:3, 10; 17:5, 24). John extends the concept to include the world of humanity (e.g., 1:10; 3:16). Although it was created as good, the human world is hostile to God (1:10-11; 3:19-20; 12:37-41). It is controlled by a darkness that cannot comprehend the light and, in fact, resists the light (3:19)...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"53":[{"id":5261,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Blood","title_en":"Blood","content_ro":"<h3>BLOOD<\/h3>\n<p>Fluid that circulates through the body of a person or a vertebrate animal. Aside from reference to the common physical substance, the term “blood” has a number of metaphorical uses in the Bible. At times, it refers to a red color: “the sun will be turned into darkness, and the moon will turn bloodred” (Acts 2:20, <span>nlt<\/span>). The “blood of the grape” means wine (Dt 32:14, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the NT the expression “flesh and blood” refers to human life, to “natural” humanity: “Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17, <span>rsv<\/span>; see also 1 Cor 15:50; Gal 1:16; Eph 6:12). After betraying Jesus, Judas recognized that he had “sinned in betraying innocent blood” (Mt 27:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). In such passages “blood” has reference to life lived at the human level, natural life as opposed to spiritual or divine life.<\/p>\n<p>The term “blood” is also used in the sense of shedding blood, that is, in killing or murder. Psalm 9:12 speaks of one “who avenges blood.” Genesis 37:26 refers to the brothers who concealed Joseph’s blood, that is, his murder. To be “burdened with the blood of another” (Prv 28:17, <span>rsv<\/span>) means to be guilty of murder. At the crucifixion Pilate said, “I am innocent of the blood of this man” (Mt 27:24-25). Thus, the idea of violent death is regularly connected with blood.<\/p>\n<p>The logic of such expressions becomes particularly clear when one sees how closely life is associated with blood. Three passages specifically tie the two together. “Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood” (Gn 9:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). “For the life of the flesh is in the blood” (Lv 17:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). “The only restriction is never to eat the blood, for the blood is the life” (Dt 12:23, <span>tlb<\/span>). Because God is the author of all life, any shedding of blood (any killing) is a serious matter. A certain sanctity associated with blood forms the basis for prohibitions against eating it. (Compare what the apostles said in Acts 15:20.) Blood stands for the “life principle” that is from God.<\/p>\n<p>Because of its association with life, blood takes on a special significance in the sacrificial motif. On the Day of Atonement (Lv 16), the blood of a bull and of a goat was sprinkled upon the altar as a “covering” of the people’s sin. Life was poured out in death. Animal life was given up on behalf of the life of the people. Judgment and atonement were carried out through a transfer of the sin of the people to the animal sacrifice. Transference is depicted also by the scapegoat in the same ceremony (Lv 16:20-22). In the first Passover (Ex 12:1-13), the blood bore the same meaning. Animal blood posted on each door was a sign that a death had already taken place, so the angel of death passed over.<\/p>\n<p>Further, because life is connected with blood, blood becomes the supreme offering to God. In the ratification of the covenant (Ex 24), Moses poured half the sacrificial blood on the altar; after reading the covenant to the people and receiving their affirmative response, he sprinkled the rest of the blood on them and said, “This blood confirms the covenant the <span>Lord<\/span> has made with you in giving you these laws” (Ex 24:8, <span>nlt<\/span>). Sprinkling blood on both the altar and the people bound God and the Israelites together in covenant relationship. In the sacrifices of Israel, blood stood for death and depending on the context, might also stand for judgment, sacrifice, substitution, or redemption. Life with God was made possible by blood.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, apart from medical references (e.g., Mt 9:20) and references to murder (e.g., Acts 22:20), the primary reference is to the blood of Christ, an allusion to the OT motifs. The synoptic Gospels show that at the Last Supper Jesus spoke of his blood with reference to a new covenant (Mt 26:28; Mk 14:24; Lk 22:20). The language surrounding those sayings reveals the sacrificial motif; Jesus was speaking of his death and its redemptive significance. The fourth Gospel expresses the same theology in different terms and in a different context: “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you cannot have eternal life within you” (Jn 6:53, <span>nlt<\/span>). The believer is said to participate by faith in the death and resurrection of the Lord (see also 1 Cor 10:16).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul’s letters likewise associate blood with Christ’s death, so much so that the word becomes—like the term “cross”—synonymous with the death of Christ in its saving significance: making peace “by means of his blood on the cross” (Col 1:20, <span>nlt<\/span>); and in a passage on reconciliation: “though you once were far away from God, now you have been brought near to him because of the blood of Christ” (Eph 2:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). “Blood” and “cross” both stand for the death of Jesus in reconciling Jew and Gentile to God and in the creation of a new humanity. Paul evidently had in mind the sacrifice of the Day of Atonement when he said that God purposed that Christ be an atoning sacrifice by his blood (Rom 3:25). His vocabulary (from Lv 16) focused on the most important sacrifice of Jewish tradition.<\/p>\n<p>Peter made reference to the blood of the covenant (Ex 24) when he described Christian exiles as having been sprinkled with the blood of Christ (1 Pt 1:2). He reminded his readers that they had been redeemed by that blood (v 19). In calling Christ the “spotless lamb of God,” he may have had in mind either the servant of Isaiah 53 or the Passover lamb, both of which had redemptive significance in his readers’ minds. Finally, to the writer of Hebrews the whole OT system of sacrifices found its ultimate fulfillment in the blood of Christ, that is, in his sacrificial death (Heb 9:7-28; 13:11-12).<\/p>\n<p>Thus, NT references to the blood of Christ point to the culminating and comprehensive redemption achieved by God in the death of his Son (Heb 10:20). Both justice and justification were thus achieved (Rom 3:26). The blood of Christ is therefore called the “once for all” means of redemption (Heb 9:26). <em>See<\/em> Atonement; Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BLOOD<\/h3>\n<p>Fluid that circulates through the body of a person or a vertebrate animal. Aside from reference to the common physical substance, the term “blood” has a number of metaphorical uses in the Bible. At times, it refers to a red color: “the sun will be turned into darkness, and the moon will turn bloodred” (Acts 2:20, <span>nlt<\/span>). The “blood of the grape” means wine (Dt 32:14, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the NT the expression “flesh and blood” refers to human life, to “natural” humanity: “Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17, <span>rsv<\/span>; see also 1 Cor 15:50; Gal 1:16; Eph 6:12). After betraying Jesus, Judas recognized that he had “sinned in betraying innocent blood” (Mt 27:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). In such passages “blood” has reference to life lived at the human level, natural life as opposed to spiritual or divine life.<\/p>\n<p>The term “blood” is also used in the sense of shedding blood, that is, in killing or murder. Psalm 9:12 speaks of one “who avenges blood.” Genesis 37:26 refers to the brothers who concealed Joseph’s blood, that is, his murder. To be “burdened with the blood of another” (Prv 28:17, <span>rsv<\/span>) means to be guilty of murder. At the crucifixion Pilate said, “I am innocent of the blood of this man” (Mt 27:24-25). Thus, the idea of violent death is regularly connected with blood.<\/p>\n<p>The logic of such expressions becomes particularly clear when one sees how closely life is associated with blood. Three passages specifically tie the two together. “Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood” (Gn 9:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). “For the life of the flesh is in the blood” (Lv 17:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). “The only restriction is never to eat the blood, for the blood is the life” (Dt 12:23, <span>tlb<\/span>). Because God is the author of all life, any shedding of blood (any killing) is a serious matter. A certain sanctity associated with blood forms the basis for prohibitions against eating it. (Compare what the apostles said in Acts 15:20.) Blood stands for the “life principle” that is from God.<\/p>\n<p>Because of its association with life, blood takes on a special significance in the sacrificial motif. On the Day of Atonement (Lv 16), the blood of a bull and of a goat was sprinkled upon the altar as a “covering” of the people’s sin. Life was poured out in death. Animal life was given up on behalf of the life of the people. Judgment and atonement were carried out through a transfer of the sin of the people to the animal sacrifice. Transference is depicted also by the scapegoat in the same ceremony (Lv 16:20-22). In the first Passover (Ex 12:1-13), the blood bore the same meaning. Animal blood posted on each door was a sign that a death had already taken place, so the angel of death passed over.<\/p>\n<p>Further, because life is connected with blood, blood becomes the supreme offering to God. In the ratification of the covenant (Ex 24), Moses poured half the sacrificial blood on the altar; after reading the covenant to the people and receiving their affirmative response, he sprinkled the rest of the blood on them and said, “This blood confirms the covenant the <span>Lord<\/span> has made with you in giving you these laws” (Ex 24:8, <span>nlt<\/span>). Sprinkling blood on both the altar and the people bound God and the Israelites together in covenant relationship. In the sacrifices of Israel, blood stood for death and depending on the context, might also stand for judgment, sacrifice, substitution, or redemption. Life with God was made possible by blood.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, apart from medical references (e.g., Mt 9:20) and references to murder (e.g., Acts 22:20), the primary reference is to the blood of Christ, an allusion to the OT motifs. The synoptic Gospels show that at the Last Supper Jesus spoke of his blood with reference to a new covenant (Mt 26:28; Mk 14:24; Lk 22:20). The language surrounding those sayings reveals the sacrificial motif; Jesus was speaking of his death and its redemptive significance. The fourth Gospel expresses the same theology in different terms and in a different context: “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you cannot have eternal life within you” (Jn 6:53, <span>nlt<\/span>). The believer is said to participate by faith in the death and resurrection of the Lord (see also 1 Cor 10:16).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul’s letters likewise associate blood with Christ’s death, so much so that the word becomes—like the term “cross”—synonymous with the death of Christ in its saving significance: making peace “by means of his blood on the cross” (Col 1:20, <span>nlt<\/span>); and in a passage on reconciliation: “though you once were far away from God, now you have been brought near to him because of the blood of Christ” (Eph 2:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). “Blood” and “cross” both stand for the death of Jesus in reconciling Jew and Gentile to God and in the creation of a new humanity. Paul evidently had in mind the sacrifice of the Day of Atonement when he said that God purposed that Christ be an atoning sacrifice by his blood (Rom 3:25). His vocabulary (from Lv 16) focused on the most important sacrifice of Jewish tradition.<\/p>\n<p>Peter made reference to the blood of the covenant (Ex 24) when he described Christian exiles as having been sprinkled with the blood of Christ (1 Pt 1:2). He reminded his readers that they had been redeemed by that blood (v 19). In calling Christ the “spotless lamb of God,” he may have had in mind either the servant of Isaiah 53 or the Passover lamb, both of which had redemptive significance in his readers’ minds. Finally, to the writer of Hebrews the whole OT system of sacrifices found its ultimate fulfillment in the blood of Christ, that is, in his sacrificial death (Heb 9:7-28; 13:11-12).<\/p>\n<p>Thus, NT references to the blood of Christ point to the culminating and comprehensive redemption achieved by God in the death of his Son (Heb 10:20). Both justice and justification were thus achieved (Rom 3:26). The blood of Christ is therefore called the “once for all” means of redemption (Heb 9:26). <em>See<\/em> Atonement; Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BLOOD Fluid that circulates through the body of a person or a vertebrate animal. Aside from reference to the common physical substance, the term “blood” has a number of metaphorical uses in the Bible. At times, it refers to a red color: “the sun will be turned into darkness, and the moon will turn bloodred” (Acts 2:20, nlt). The “blood of the grape” means wine (Dt 32:14, rsv). In the NT the expression “flesh and blood” refers to human life, to “natural” humanity: “Flesh and blood has not reve...","summary_en":"BLOOD Fluid that circulates through the body of a person or a vertebrate animal. Aside from reference to the common physical substance, the term “blood” has a number of metaphorical uses in the Bible. At times, it refers to a red color: “the sun will be turned into darkness, and the moon will turn bloodred” (Acts 2:20, nlt). The “blood of the grape” means wine (Dt 32:14, rsv). In the NT the expression “flesh and blood” refers to human life, to “natural” humanity: “Flesh and blood has not reve...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56451,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:53","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:53","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:53-58<\/strong> <em>eat the flesh . . . drink his blood:<\/em> Jesus answered the question the people asked (6:52). His words hinted at the Lord’s Supper yet to come (see Luke 22:19). Since “flesh and blood” was a Jewish idiom for the whole person, Jesus might have been calling people to consume him fully by completely believing in him. Some Christian traditions see the bread as Christ’s literal flesh broken for us and the wine as his literal blood poured out for us. Others take the meaning in purely spiritual terms. Either way, receiving communion means no less than embracing Jesus’ life-giving sacrifice.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:53-58<\/strong> <em>eat the flesh . . . drink his blood:<\/em> Jesus answered the question the people asked (6:52). His words hinted at the Lord’s Supper yet to come (see Luke 22:19). Since “flesh and blood” was a Jewish idiom for the whole person, Jesus might have been calling people to consume him fully by completely believing in him. Some Christian traditions see the bread as Christ’s literal flesh broken for us and the wine as his literal blood poured out for us. Others take the meaning in purely spiritual terms. Either way, receiving communion means no less than embracing Jesus’ life-giving sacrifice.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:53-58 eat the flesh . . . drink his blood: Jesus answered the question the people asked (6:52). His words hinted at the Lord’s Supper yet to come (see Luke 22:19). Since “flesh and blood” was a Jewish idiom for the whole person, Jesus might have been calling people to consume him fully by completely believing in him. Some Christian traditions see the bread as Christ’s literal flesh broken for us and the wine as his literal blood poured out for us. Others take the meaning in purely spiritual...","summary_en":"6:53-58 eat the flesh . . . drink his blood: Jesus answered the question the people asked (6:52). His words hinted at the Lord’s Supper yet to come (see Luke 22:19). Since “flesh and blood” was a Jewish idiom for the whole person, Jesus might have been calling people to consume him fully by completely believing in him. Some Christian traditions see the bread as Christ’s literal flesh broken for us and the wine as his literal blood poured out for us. Others take the meaning in purely spiritual...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84077,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:53","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:53","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:53-58<\/strong> <em>eat the flesh . . . drink his blood:<\/em> Jesus answered the question the people asked (6:52). His words hinted at the Lord’s Supper yet to come (see Luke 22:19). Since “flesh and blood” was a Jewish idiom for the whole person, Jesus might have been calling people to consume him fully by completely believing in him. Some Christian traditions see the bread as Christ’s literal flesh broken for us and the wine as his literal blood poured out for us. Others take the meaning in purely spiritual terms. Either way, receiving communion means no less than embracing Jesus’ life-giving sacrifice.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:53-58<\/strong> <em>eat the flesh . . . drink his blood:<\/em> Jesus answered the question the people asked (6:52). His words hinted at the Lord’s Supper yet to come (see Luke 22:19). Since “flesh and blood” was a Jewish idiom for the whole person, Jesus might have been calling people to consume him fully by completely believing in him. Some Christian traditions see the bread as Christ’s literal flesh broken for us and the wine as his literal blood poured out for us. Others take the meaning in purely spiritual terms. Either way, receiving communion means no less than embracing Jesus’ life-giving sacrifice.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:53-58 eat the flesh . . . drink his blood: Jesus answered the question the people asked (6:52). His words hinted at the Lord’s Supper yet to come (see Luke 22:19). Since “flesh and blood” was a Jewish idiom for the whole person, Jesus might have been calling people to consume him fully by completely believing in him. Some Christian traditions see the bread as Christ’s literal flesh broken for us and the wine as his literal blood poured out for us. Others take the meaning in purely spiritual...","summary_en":"6:53-58 eat the flesh . . . drink his blood: Jesus answered the question the people asked (6:52). His words hinted at the Lord’s Supper yet to come (see Luke 22:19). Since “flesh and blood” was a Jewish idiom for the whole person, Jesus might have been calling people to consume him fully by completely believing in him. Some Christian traditions see the bread as Christ’s literal flesh broken for us and the wine as his literal blood poured out for us. Others take the meaning in purely spiritual...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111703,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:53","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:53","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:53-58<\/strong> <em>eat the flesh . . . drink his blood:<\/em> Jesus answered the question the people asked (6:52). His words hinted at the Lord’s Supper yet to come (see Luke 22:19). Since “flesh and blood” was a Jewish idiom for the whole person, Jesus might have been calling people to consume him fully by completely believing in him. Some Christian traditions see the bread as Christ’s literal flesh broken for us and the wine as his literal blood poured out for us. Others take the meaning in purely spiritual terms. Either way, receiving communion means no less than embracing Jesus’ life-giving sacrifice.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:53-58<\/strong> <em>eat the flesh . . . drink his blood:<\/em> Jesus answered the question the people asked (6:52). His words hinted at the Lord’s Supper yet to come (see Luke 22:19). Since “flesh and blood” was a Jewish idiom for the whole person, Jesus might have been calling people to consume him fully by completely believing in him. Some Christian traditions see the bread as Christ’s literal flesh broken for us and the wine as his literal blood poured out for us. Others take the meaning in purely spiritual terms. Either way, receiving communion means no less than embracing Jesus’ life-giving sacrifice.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:53-58 eat the flesh . . . drink his blood: Jesus answered the question the people asked (6:52). His words hinted at the Lord’s Supper yet to come (see Luke 22:19). Since “flesh and blood” was a Jewish idiom for the whole person, Jesus might have been calling people to consume him fully by completely believing in him. Some Christian traditions see the bread as Christ’s literal flesh broken for us and the wine as his literal blood poured out for us. Others take the meaning in purely spiritual...","summary_en":"6:53-58 eat the flesh . . . drink his blood: Jesus answered the question the people asked (6:52). His words hinted at the Lord’s Supper yet to come (see Luke 22:19). Since “flesh and blood” was a Jewish idiom for the whole person, Jesus might have been calling people to consume him fully by completely believing in him. Some Christian traditions see the bread as Christ’s literal flesh broken for us and the wine as his literal blood poured out for us. Others take the meaning in purely spiritual...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139329,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:53","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:53","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:53-58<\/strong> <em>eat the flesh . . . drink his blood:<\/em> Jesus answered the question the people asked (6:52). His words hinted at the Lord’s Supper yet to come (see Luke 22:19). Since “flesh and blood” was a Jewish idiom for the whole person, Jesus might have been calling people to consume him fully by completely believing in him. Some Christian traditions see the bread as Christ’s literal flesh broken for us and the wine as his literal blood poured out for us. Others take the meaning in purely spiritual terms. Either way, receiving communion means no less than embracing Jesus’ life-giving sacrifice.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:53-58<\/strong> <em>eat the flesh . . . drink his blood:<\/em> Jesus answered the question the people asked (6:52). His words hinted at the Lord’s Supper yet to come (see Luke 22:19). Since “flesh and blood” was a Jewish idiom for the whole person, Jesus might have been calling people to consume him fully by completely believing in him. Some Christian traditions see the bread as Christ’s literal flesh broken for us and the wine as his literal blood poured out for us. Others take the meaning in purely spiritual terms. Either way, receiving communion means no less than embracing Jesus’ life-giving sacrifice.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:53-58 eat the flesh . . . drink his blood: Jesus answered the question the people asked (6:52). His words hinted at the Lord’s Supper yet to come (see Luke 22:19). Since “flesh and blood” was a Jewish idiom for the whole person, Jesus might have been calling people to consume him fully by completely believing in him. Some Christian traditions see the bread as Christ’s literal flesh broken for us and the wine as his literal blood poured out for us. Others take the meaning in purely spiritual...","summary_en":"6:53-58 eat the flesh . . . drink his blood: Jesus answered the question the people asked (6:52). His words hinted at the Lord’s Supper yet to come (see Luke 22:19). Since “flesh and blood” was a Jewish idiom for the whole person, Jesus might have been calling people to consume him fully by completely believing in him. Some Christian traditions see the bread as Christ’s literal flesh broken for us and the wine as his literal blood poured out for us. Others take the meaning in purely spiritual...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64987,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92613,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120239,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147865,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"54":[{"id":67097,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead","title_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","summary_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94723,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead","title_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","summary_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122349,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead","title_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","summary_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149975,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead","title_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","summary_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"56":[{"id":66029,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Remaining in Christ","title_en":"Remaining in Christ","content_ro":"<h3>Remaining in Christ<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō en,<\/span> ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when we remain in Christ, the Son is in us and we are in the Father and the Son (17:21-23). Both the Father and the Son come and make their home within disciples.<\/p>\n<p>This mutual indwelling is precisely what it means that the disciple remains in Christ. We cannot gain the permanence of our relationship by our own effort; this relationship is only made permanent by the gracious initiative of God indwelling our lives through his Spirit. This means commitment on the part of both God and the disciple. The mutual indwelling between God and the believer is not a fleeting or temporary commitment, but an enduring, permanent, and eternal relationship (see 1 Jn 2:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:11; 34:28; Josh 7:11-12; 1 Sam 16:22; Pss 22:11, 19; 101:7; Dan 1:21; 2:49; Hag 2:5; Luke 15:31; 22:28; John 6:56; 8:31; 15:1-17; Phil 4:1; 1 Jn 2:19, 27-28; 3:24; 2 Jn 1:9; Rev 2:10; 13:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Remaining in Christ<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō en,<\/span> ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when we remain in Christ, the Son is in us and we are in the Father and the Son (17:21-23). Both the Father and the Son come and make their home within disciples.<\/p>\n<p>This mutual indwelling is precisely what it means that the disciple remains in Christ. We cannot gain the permanence of our relationship by our own effort; this relationship is only made permanent by the gracious initiative of God indwelling our lives through his Spirit. This means commitment on the part of both God and the disciple. The mutual indwelling between God and the believer is not a fleeting or temporary commitment, but an enduring, permanent, and eternal relationship (see 1 Jn 2:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:11; 34:28; Josh 7:11-12; 1 Sam 16:22; Pss 22:11, 19; 101:7; Dan 1:21; 2:49; Hag 2:5; Luke 15:31; 22:28; John 6:56; 8:31; 15:1-17; Phil 4:1; 1 Jn 2:19, 27-28; 3:24; 2 Jn 1:9; Rev 2:10; 13:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Remaining in Christ The Greek term menō, often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [menō en, ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when ...","summary_en":"Remaining in Christ The Greek term menō, often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [menō en, ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93655,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Remaining in Christ","title_en":"Remaining in Christ","content_ro":"<h3>Remaining in Christ<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō en,<\/span> ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when we remain in Christ, the Son is in us and we are in the Father and the Son (17:21-23). Both the Father and the Son come and make their home within disciples.<\/p>\n<p>This mutual indwelling is precisely what it means that the disciple remains in Christ. We cannot gain the permanence of our relationship by our own effort; this relationship is only made permanent by the gracious initiative of God indwelling our lives through his Spirit. This means commitment on the part of both God and the disciple. The mutual indwelling between God and the believer is not a fleeting or temporary commitment, but an enduring, permanent, and eternal relationship (see 1 Jn 2:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:11; 34:28; Josh 7:11-12; 1 Sam 16:22; Pss 22:11, 19; 101:7; Dan 1:21; 2:49; Hag 2:5; Luke 15:31; 22:28; John 6:56; 8:31; 15:1-17; Phil 4:1; 1 Jn 2:19, 27-28; 3:24; 2 Jn 1:9; Rev 2:10; 13:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Remaining in Christ<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō en,<\/span> ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when we remain in Christ, the Son is in us and we are in the Father and the Son (17:21-23). Both the Father and the Son come and make their home within disciples.<\/p>\n<p>This mutual indwelling is precisely what it means that the disciple remains in Christ. We cannot gain the permanence of our relationship by our own effort; this relationship is only made permanent by the gracious initiative of God indwelling our lives through his Spirit. This means commitment on the part of both God and the disciple. The mutual indwelling between God and the believer is not a fleeting or temporary commitment, but an enduring, permanent, and eternal relationship (see 1 Jn 2:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:11; 34:28; Josh 7:11-12; 1 Sam 16:22; Pss 22:11, 19; 101:7; Dan 1:21; 2:49; Hag 2:5; Luke 15:31; 22:28; John 6:56; 8:31; 15:1-17; Phil 4:1; 1 Jn 2:19, 27-28; 3:24; 2 Jn 1:9; Rev 2:10; 13:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Remaining in Christ The Greek term menō, often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [menō en, ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when ...","summary_en":"Remaining in Christ The Greek term menō, often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [menō en, ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121281,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Remaining in Christ","title_en":"Remaining in Christ","content_ro":"<h3>Remaining in Christ<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō en,<\/span> ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when we remain in Christ, the Son is in us and we are in the Father and the Son (17:21-23). Both the Father and the Son come and make their home within disciples.<\/p>\n<p>This mutual indwelling is precisely what it means that the disciple remains in Christ. We cannot gain the permanence of our relationship by our own effort; this relationship is only made permanent by the gracious initiative of God indwelling our lives through his Spirit. This means commitment on the part of both God and the disciple. The mutual indwelling between God and the believer is not a fleeting or temporary commitment, but an enduring, permanent, and eternal relationship (see 1 Jn 2:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:11; 34:28; Josh 7:11-12; 1 Sam 16:22; Pss 22:11, 19; 101:7; Dan 1:21; 2:49; Hag 2:5; Luke 15:31; 22:28; John 6:56; 8:31; 15:1-17; Phil 4:1; 1 Jn 2:19, 27-28; 3:24; 2 Jn 1:9; Rev 2:10; 13:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Remaining in Christ<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō en,<\/span> ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when we remain in Christ, the Son is in us and we are in the Father and the Son (17:21-23). Both the Father and the Son come and make their home within disciples.<\/p>\n<p>This mutual indwelling is precisely what it means that the disciple remains in Christ. We cannot gain the permanence of our relationship by our own effort; this relationship is only made permanent by the gracious initiative of God indwelling our lives through his Spirit. This means commitment on the part of both God and the disciple. The mutual indwelling between God and the believer is not a fleeting or temporary commitment, but an enduring, permanent, and eternal relationship (see 1 Jn 2:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:11; 34:28; Josh 7:11-12; 1 Sam 16:22; Pss 22:11, 19; 101:7; Dan 1:21; 2:49; Hag 2:5; Luke 15:31; 22:28; John 6:56; 8:31; 15:1-17; Phil 4:1; 1 Jn 2:19, 27-28; 3:24; 2 Jn 1:9; Rev 2:10; 13:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Remaining in Christ The Greek term menō, often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [menō en, ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when ...","summary_en":"Remaining in Christ The Greek term menō, often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [menō en, ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148907,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Remaining in Christ","title_en":"Remaining in Christ","content_ro":"<h3>Remaining in Christ<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō en,<\/span> ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when we remain in Christ, the Son is in us and we are in the Father and the Son (17:21-23). Both the Father and the Son come and make their home within disciples.<\/p>\n<p>This mutual indwelling is precisely what it means that the disciple remains in Christ. We cannot gain the permanence of our relationship by our own effort; this relationship is only made permanent by the gracious initiative of God indwelling our lives through his Spirit. This means commitment on the part of both God and the disciple. The mutual indwelling between God and the believer is not a fleeting or temporary commitment, but an enduring, permanent, and eternal relationship (see 1 Jn 2:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:11; 34:28; Josh 7:11-12; 1 Sam 16:22; Pss 22:11, 19; 101:7; Dan 1:21; 2:49; Hag 2:5; Luke 15:31; 22:28; John 6:56; 8:31; 15:1-17; Phil 4:1; 1 Jn 2:19, 27-28; 3:24; 2 Jn 1:9; Rev 2:10; 13:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Remaining in Christ<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō<\/span><em>,<\/em> often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">menō en,<\/span> ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when we remain in Christ, the Son is in us and we are in the Father and the Son (17:21-23). Both the Father and the Son come and make their home within disciples.<\/p>\n<p>This mutual indwelling is precisely what it means that the disciple remains in Christ. We cannot gain the permanence of our relationship by our own effort; this relationship is only made permanent by the gracious initiative of God indwelling our lives through his Spirit. This means commitment on the part of both God and the disciple. The mutual indwelling between God and the believer is not a fleeting or temporary commitment, but an enduring, permanent, and eternal relationship (see 1 Jn 2:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:11; 34:28; Josh 7:11-12; 1 Sam 16:22; Pss 22:11, 19; 101:7; Dan 1:21; 2:49; Hag 2:5; Luke 15:31; 22:28; John 6:56; 8:31; 15:1-17; Phil 4:1; 1 Jn 2:19, 27-28; 3:24; 2 Jn 1:9; Rev 2:10; 13:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Remaining in Christ The Greek term menō, often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [menō en, ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when ...","summary_en":"Remaining in Christ The Greek term menō, often translated “remain,” “stay,” or “abide,” occurs frequently in relation to Jesus’ descriptions of profound, intimate, and enduring relationships. For example, Jesus said, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to [menō en, ‘stay in’] my teachings” (John 8:31). The idea is that a disciple’s life is fully formed by Jesus’ word. Jesus also described how the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son (John 14:10-11). Likewise, when ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"57":[{"id":20195,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of John","title_en":"Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","summary_en":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23177,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Life","title_en":"Life","content_ro":"<h3>LIFE<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical perspective, life flows from the living Father through the Son (his agent in creation and redemption) into a world thirsting for “real” life (see Jn 6:57).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLivingFather\">The Living Father<\/p>\n<p>God the Father is above all else “the living God” (Jer 10:10; Jn 5:26). God, the source of all life (1 Tm 6:13), “inbreathed” humans at creation and sustains them continually (Jb 34:14-15). God alone gives life (Gn 17:16) and takes it away (Gn 3:22-24; 6:3; Ps 104:29; Lk 12:20).<\/p>\n<p>The sign of life is movement; man is a “lively,” animated body (Mt 27:50; Lk 8:55). Animals also have this animating “breath-soul” (Hebrew of Gn 1:24; 6:17). Thus, all nature is instilled with life deriving from God (Acts 17:24-28). Life is therefore sacred, but unfortunately it is as transient as grass, clouds, dew, shadow (1 Chr 29:15; Jb 7:6, 9; Jas 4:13-16; 1 Pt 1:24). Long life is desired (Gn 35:29); any life is preferable to death and of infinite value (Eccl 9:4-6; Mt 6:25; 16:26), for Sheol houses a ghostly “nonliving life,” bereft of feeling, hope, or divine help (Ps 88:3-12). One’s life can be enhanced by loving and serving God (Dt 30:15-20; 1 Pt 3:8-12), by experiencing God’s deliverance (Is 38:16), and by receiving divine blessings (Mt 5:3-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristasLife\">Christ as Life<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word for “life” is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">zoe<\/span><em>.<\/em> In classical Greek this word was used for life in general. There are a few examples of this meaning in the New Testament (see Acts 17:25; Jas 4:14: Rv 16:3), but in all other instances the word was used to designate the divine, eternal life—the life of God (Eph 4:18). This life resided in Christ, and he made it available to all who believe in him. Human beings are born with the natural life—called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuche<\/span> in Greek (translated “soul,” “personality,” or “life”); they do not possess the eternal life. This life can be received only by believing in the one who possesses the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">zoe<\/span><em>-life,<\/em> namely, Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The overflowing, vibrant quality of life made available in Christ was evident in the authority of his speech and the power of his touch (Mt 9:18; Mk 1:27, 41-42; 5:27-29). He is “the author of life” (Acts 3:15), who provides the way into life (Mt 7:14; 25:46; Mk 8:35-37; 9:42-47). And he raised the dead with his life-giving power. His own resurrection made him “a life-giving spirit,” with the power of “an indestructible life” (Rom 8:2; 1 Cor 15:45; Heb 7:16). Thus, Jesus Christ is “our life” (Col 3:4)—in union with whom we find “newness of life” (Rom 6:4) and are newly created, living henceforth not for ourselves but for him (2 Cor 5:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>John, especially, dwells on the theme that Christ is the source of this new life (Jn 3:14-16; 5:21) for the children of God (1:12; 3:3, 5). This life is enjoyed already by those who know God and Christ (5:24; 17:3; 1 Jn 5:11-12), for they have already passed from death into eternal life (Jn 10:28; 11:26). Such life is abundant (10:10), enlightened (8:12), free and satisfied (10:9), victorious (Rom 6:6-14), full of peace and joy (Rom 5:1-11), inexhaustibly refreshed (Jn 4:13-14; 7:37-38) and immortal (Jn 5:24; 1 Cor 15:51-57).<\/p>\n<p>All this is possible because from the beginning “all that came to be was alive with his life” (Jn 1:4, <span>neb<\/span>). Thus, the life within the Father flows into the world through the Son, who also “has life in himself” and gives it to whom he will (5:26). He is “the resurrection and the life” (11:25; 14:6) and demonstrates it by restoring life to paralyzed limbs, raising the dead, and conquering death (5:5-9; 11:43; ch 20). People remain in death only because they will not “come” and “have life” (5:40; cf. 1 Jn 3:14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eternal Life.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LIFE<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical perspective, life flows from the living Father through the Son (his agent in creation and redemption) into a world thirsting for “real” life (see Jn 6:57).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLivingFather\">The Living Father<\/p>\n<p>God the Father is above all else “the living God” (Jer 10:10; Jn 5:26). God, the source of all life (1 Tm 6:13), “inbreathed” humans at creation and sustains them continually (Jb 34:14-15). God alone gives life (Gn 17:16) and takes it away (Gn 3:22-24; 6:3; Ps 104:29; Lk 12:20).<\/p>\n<p>The sign of life is movement; man is a “lively,” animated body (Mt 27:50; Lk 8:55). Animals also have this animating “breath-soul” (Hebrew of Gn 1:24; 6:17). Thus, all nature is instilled with life deriving from God (Acts 17:24-28). Life is therefore sacred, but unfortunately it is as transient as grass, clouds, dew, shadow (1 Chr 29:15; Jb 7:6, 9; Jas 4:13-16; 1 Pt 1:24). Long life is desired (Gn 35:29); any life is preferable to death and of infinite value (Eccl 9:4-6; Mt 6:25; 16:26), for Sheol houses a ghostly “nonliving life,” bereft of feeling, hope, or divine help (Ps 88:3-12). One’s life can be enhanced by loving and serving God (Dt 30:15-20; 1 Pt 3:8-12), by experiencing God’s deliverance (Is 38:16), and by receiving divine blessings (Mt 5:3-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristasLife\">Christ as Life<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word for “life” is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">zoe<\/span><em>.<\/em> In classical Greek this word was used for life in general. There are a few examples of this meaning in the New Testament (see Acts 17:25; Jas 4:14: Rv 16:3), but in all other instances the word was used to designate the divine, eternal life—the life of God (Eph 4:18). This life resided in Christ, and he made it available to all who believe in him. Human beings are born with the natural life—called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuche<\/span> in Greek (translated “soul,” “personality,” or “life”); they do not possess the eternal life. This life can be received only by believing in the one who possesses the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">zoe<\/span><em>-life,<\/em> namely, Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The overflowing, vibrant quality of life made available in Christ was evident in the authority of his speech and the power of his touch (Mt 9:18; Mk 1:27, 41-42; 5:27-29). He is “the author of life” (Acts 3:15), who provides the way into life (Mt 7:14; 25:46; Mk 8:35-37; 9:42-47). And he raised the dead with his life-giving power. His own resurrection made him “a life-giving spirit,” with the power of “an indestructible life” (Rom 8:2; 1 Cor 15:45; Heb 7:16). Thus, Jesus Christ is “our life” (Col 3:4)—in union with whom we find “newness of life” (Rom 6:4) and are newly created, living henceforth not for ourselves but for him (2 Cor 5:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>John, especially, dwells on the theme that Christ is the source of this new life (Jn 3:14-16; 5:21) for the children of God (1:12; 3:3, 5). This life is enjoyed already by those who know God and Christ (5:24; 17:3; 1 Jn 5:11-12), for they have already passed from death into eternal life (Jn 10:28; 11:26). Such life is abundant (10:10), enlightened (8:12), free and satisfied (10:9), victorious (Rom 6:6-14), full of peace and joy (Rom 5:1-11), inexhaustibly refreshed (Jn 4:13-14; 7:37-38) and immortal (Jn 5:24; 1 Cor 15:51-57).<\/p>\n<p>All this is possible because from the beginning “all that came to be was alive with his life” (Jn 1:4, <span>neb<\/span>). Thus, the life within the Father flows into the world through the Son, who also “has life in himself” and gives it to whom he will (5:26). He is “the resurrection and the life” (11:25; 14:6) and demonstrates it by restoring life to paralyzed limbs, raising the dead, and conquering death (5:5-9; 11:43; ch 20). People remain in death only because they will not “come” and “have life” (5:40; cf. 1 Jn 3:14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eternal Life.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LIFE In biblical perspective, life flows from the living Father through the Son (his agent in creation and redemption) into a world thirsting for “real” life (see Jn 6:57). The Living Father God the Father is above all else “the living God” (Jer 10:10; Jn 5:26). God, the source of all life (1 Tm 6:13), “inbreathed” humans at creation and sustains them continually (Jb 34:14-15). God alone gives life (Gn 17:16) and takes it away (Gn 3:22-24; 6:3; Ps 104:29; Lk 12:20). The sign of life is moveme...","summary_en":"LIFE In biblical perspective, life flows from the living Father through the Son (his agent in creation and redemption) into a world thirsting for “real” life (see Jn 6:57). The Living Father God the Father is above all else “the living God” (Jer 10:10; Jn 5:26). God, the source of all life (1 Tm 6:13), “inbreathed” humans at creation and sustains them continually (Jb 34:14-15). God alone gives life (Gn 17:16) and takes it away (Gn 3:22-24; 6:3; Ps 104:29; Lk 12:20). The sign of life is moveme...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"59":[{"id":36863,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Teacher","title_en":"Teacher","content_ro":"<h3>TEACHER<\/h3>\n<p>Teachers conserved the values and academia of a nation and passed them on to each new generation. In OT times the first teachers were often parents (Dt 6:7, 20-25; 11:19-21). Leaders like Moses and Aaron were charged with teaching the people (Lv 10:11), and later the priests and Levites had a teaching function (Dt 24:8; 33:8-10; 2 Chr 17:7-9; Ez 44:23; Mi 3:11). God himself was thought of as a teacher (Pss 25:8, 12; 27:11; 32:8; 86:11; Is 2:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the Greek noun for “teacher” and the verb “to teach” are widely used. John the Baptist was called a teacher (Lk 3:12). The term is used more than 30 times of Jesus (Mt 4:23; 5:2; 7:29; 9:35; 11:1; Mk 1:21; 2:13; 4:1-2; 6:2, 6, 34; Lk 4:15, 31; 5:3; 6:6; Jn 6:59; 7:14, 28; etc.). People recognized his teaching as authoritative (Mt 7:29; Mk 1:22; Lk 4:32). Even as a boy of 12 he conversed in a profound way with the teachers of the law in the temple (Lk 2:46). These men were often associated with the Pharisees (5:17). Gamaliel was a Pharisee and a teacher of the law (Acts 5:34). The term “rabbi” was often used to denote teacher. The rabbi was held in great honor. In the early church the teacher was widely recognized (Acts 13:1; 1 Cor 12:28-29; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:11; Jas 3:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TEACHER<\/h3>\n<p>Teachers conserved the values and academia of a nation and passed them on to each new generation. In OT times the first teachers were often parents (Dt 6:7, 20-25; 11:19-21). Leaders like Moses and Aaron were charged with teaching the people (Lv 10:11), and later the priests and Levites had a teaching function (Dt 24:8; 33:8-10; 2 Chr 17:7-9; Ez 44:23; Mi 3:11). God himself was thought of as a teacher (Pss 25:8, 12; 27:11; 32:8; 86:11; Is 2:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the Greek noun for “teacher” and the verb “to teach” are widely used. John the Baptist was called a teacher (Lk 3:12). The term is used more than 30 times of Jesus (Mt 4:23; 5:2; 7:29; 9:35; 11:1; Mk 1:21; 2:13; 4:1-2; 6:2, 6, 34; Lk 4:15, 31; 5:3; 6:6; Jn 6:59; 7:14, 28; etc.). People recognized his teaching as authoritative (Mt 7:29; Mk 1:22; Lk 4:32). Even as a boy of 12 he conversed in a profound way with the teachers of the law in the temple (Lk 2:46). These men were often associated with the Pharisees (5:17). Gamaliel was a Pharisee and a teacher of the law (Acts 5:34). The term “rabbi” was often used to denote teacher. The rabbi was held in great honor. In the early church the teacher was widely recognized (Acts 13:1; 1 Cor 12:28-29; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:11; Jas 3:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"TEACHER Teachers conserved the values and academia of a nation and passed them on to each new generation. In OT times the first teachers were often parents (Dt 6:7, 20-25; 11:19-21). Leaders like Moses and Aaron were charged with teaching the people (Lv 10:11), and later the priests and Levites had a teaching function (Dt 24:8; 33:8-10; 2 Chr 17:7-9; Ez 44:23; Mi 3:11). God himself was thought of as a teacher (Pss 25:8, 12; 27:11; 32:8; 86:11; Is 2:3). In the NT the Greek noun for “teacher” a...","summary_en":"TEACHER Teachers conserved the values and academia of a nation and passed them on to each new generation. In OT times the first teachers were often parents (Dt 6:7, 20-25; 11:19-21). Leaders like Moses and Aaron were charged with teaching the people (Lv 10:11), and later the priests and Levites had a teaching function (Dt 24:8; 33:8-10; 2 Chr 17:7-9; Ez 44:23; Mi 3:11). God himself was thought of as a teacher (Pss 25:8, 12; 27:11; 32:8; 86:11; Is 2:3). In the NT the Greek noun for “teacher” a...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"60":[{"id":33115,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Riddle","title_en":"Riddle","content_ro":"<h3>RIDDLE<\/h3>\n<p>Word puzzle widely used and esteemed in the ancient world, both as an everyday amusement and as a test of wisdom at a more serious level. The point of a riddle was the discovery of a concealed meaning. Riddles, therefore, may be broadly distinguished from fables, which, like Jotham’s celebrated plant fable (Jgs 9:7-15), contained an easily discerned significance. Obviously, there is an intermediate area where there is no sharp differentiation. For instance, Ezekiel’s riddle (Ez 17) has sometimes been classified as a plant fable.<\/p>\n<p>Samson’s riddle at his wedding feast is the best-known biblical riddle (Jgs 14). Probably it was a form of diversion used on such occasions (vv 12-13). The riddle took the form of a couplet: “From the one who eats came something to eat; out of the strong came something sweet” (v 14). Samson’s 30 young men threatened his betrothed, who wheedled the secret from him: “What is sweeter than honey? What is stronger than a lion?” (v 18).<\/p>\n<p>Solomon’s wisdom was demonstrated in his ability to answer the “hard questions” (lit., “riddles”) of the queen of Sheba (1 Kgs 10:1-4). His reputation for this kind of wisdom is further demonstrated by Ben Sirach: “Your soul covered the earth, and you filled it with parables and riddles” (Ecclus 47:15).<\/p>\n<p>Josephus notes a contest of wits between Solomon and Hiram, with riddles being exchanged. Solomon won the earlier exchanges, but Hiram finally outwitted him by enlisting outside help (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 8.5.5). Such wisdom to solve riddles was, understandably, claimed by Israel’s wise men (e.g., Ps 49:4; Prv 1:6). In Daniel 8:23-24 there is the apocalyptic vision of “a master of intrigue [who] will rise to power” (lit. “one who understands riddles”). Daniel himself possessed the same ability to “interpret dreams, explain riddles, and solve difficult problems” (Dn 5:12).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT riddles figure infrequently. The various “hard sayings” of Jesus (e.g., Jn 6:60) are difficult to accept and are equally as hard to understand. Possibly the only true riddle is the number of the beast, 666 (Rv 13:18). Various attempts have been made to identify a person, after the pattern of numerical references in contemporary literature. Of these, the emperor Nero is the most plausible candidate.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RIDDLE<\/h3>\n<p>Word puzzle widely used and esteemed in the ancient world, both as an everyday amusement and as a test of wisdom at a more serious level. The point of a riddle was the discovery of a concealed meaning. Riddles, therefore, may be broadly distinguished from fables, which, like Jotham’s celebrated plant fable (Jgs 9:7-15), contained an easily discerned significance. Obviously, there is an intermediate area where there is no sharp differentiation. For instance, Ezekiel’s riddle (Ez 17) has sometimes been classified as a plant fable.<\/p>\n<p>Samson’s riddle at his wedding feast is the best-known biblical riddle (Jgs 14). Probably it was a form of diversion used on such occasions (vv 12-13). The riddle took the form of a couplet: “From the one who eats came something to eat; out of the strong came something sweet” (v 14). Samson’s 30 young men threatened his betrothed, who wheedled the secret from him: “What is sweeter than honey? What is stronger than a lion?” (v 18).<\/p>\n<p>Solomon’s wisdom was demonstrated in his ability to answer the “hard questions” (lit., “riddles”) of the queen of Sheba (1 Kgs 10:1-4). His reputation for this kind of wisdom is further demonstrated by Ben Sirach: “Your soul covered the earth, and you filled it with parables and riddles” (Ecclus 47:15).<\/p>\n<p>Josephus notes a contest of wits between Solomon and Hiram, with riddles being exchanged. Solomon won the earlier exchanges, but Hiram finally outwitted him by enlisting outside help (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 8.5.5). Such wisdom to solve riddles was, understandably, claimed by Israel’s wise men (e.g., Ps 49:4; Prv 1:6). In Daniel 8:23-24 there is the apocalyptic vision of “a master of intrigue [who] will rise to power” (lit. “one who understands riddles”). Daniel himself possessed the same ability to “interpret dreams, explain riddles, and solve difficult problems” (Dn 5:12).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT riddles figure infrequently. The various “hard sayings” of Jesus (e.g., Jn 6:60) are difficult to accept and are equally as hard to understand. Possibly the only true riddle is the number of the beast, 666 (Rv 13:18). Various attempts have been made to identify a person, after the pattern of numerical references in contemporary literature. Of these, the emperor Nero is the most plausible candidate.<\/p>","summary_ro":"RIDDLE Word puzzle widely used and esteemed in the ancient world, both as an everyday amusement and as a test of wisdom at a more serious level. The point of a riddle was the discovery of a concealed meaning. Riddles, therefore, may be broadly distinguished from fables, which, like Jotham’s celebrated plant fable (Jgs 9:7-15), contained an easily discerned significance. Obviously, there is an intermediate area where there is no sharp differentiation. For instance, Ezekiel’s riddle (Ez 17) has...","summary_en":"RIDDLE Word puzzle widely used and esteemed in the ancient world, both as an everyday amusement and as a test of wisdom at a more serious level. The point of a riddle was the discovery of a concealed meaning. Riddles, therefore, may be broadly distinguished from fables, which, like Jotham’s celebrated plant fable (Jgs 9:7-15), contained an easily discerned significance. Obviously, there is an intermediate area where there is no sharp differentiation. For instance, Ezekiel’s riddle (Ez 17) has...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56452,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:60","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:60","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:60-61<\/strong> Jesus’ language (6:53-58) was shocking, offensive (see Gen 9:4-5), and <em>hard to understand<\/em> for his disciples, just as it was to the crowd. Were they to take him literally? How would they eat his flesh? Jesus’ answer is in John 6:63.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:60-61<\/strong> Jesus’ language (6:53-58) was shocking, offensive (see Gen 9:4-5), and <em>hard to understand<\/em> for his disciples, just as it was to the crowd. Were they to take him literally? How would they eat his flesh? Jesus’ answer is in John 6:63.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:60-61 Jesus’ language (6:53-58) was shocking, offensive (see Gen 9:4-5), and hard to understand for his disciples, just as it was to the crowd. Were they to take him literally? How would they eat his flesh? Jesus’ answer is in John 6:63.","summary_en":"6:60-61 Jesus’ language (6:53-58) was shocking, offensive (see Gen 9:4-5), and hard to understand for his disciples, just as it was to the crowd. Were they to take him literally? How would they eat his flesh? Jesus’ answer is in John 6:63.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84078,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:60","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:60","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:60-61<\/strong> Jesus’ language (6:53-58) was shocking, offensive (see Gen 9:4-5), and <em>hard to understand<\/em> for his disciples, just as it was to the crowd. Were they to take him literally? How would they eat his flesh? Jesus’ answer is in John 6:63.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:60-61<\/strong> Jesus’ language (6:53-58) was shocking, offensive (see Gen 9:4-5), and <em>hard to understand<\/em> for his disciples, just as it was to the crowd. Were they to take him literally? How would they eat his flesh? Jesus’ answer is in John 6:63.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:60-61 Jesus’ language (6:53-58) was shocking, offensive (see Gen 9:4-5), and hard to understand for his disciples, just as it was to the crowd. Were they to take him literally? How would they eat his flesh? Jesus’ answer is in John 6:63.","summary_en":"6:60-61 Jesus’ language (6:53-58) was shocking, offensive (see Gen 9:4-5), and hard to understand for his disciples, just as it was to the crowd. Were they to take him literally? How would they eat his flesh? Jesus’ answer is in John 6:63.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111704,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:60","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:60","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:60-61<\/strong> Jesus’ language (6:53-58) was shocking, offensive (see Gen 9:4-5), and <em>hard to understand<\/em> for his disciples, just as it was to the crowd. Were they to take him literally? How would they eat his flesh? Jesus’ answer is in John 6:63.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:60-61<\/strong> Jesus’ language (6:53-58) was shocking, offensive (see Gen 9:4-5), and <em>hard to understand<\/em> for his disciples, just as it was to the crowd. Were they to take him literally? How would they eat his flesh? Jesus’ answer is in John 6:63.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:60-61 Jesus’ language (6:53-58) was shocking, offensive (see Gen 9:4-5), and hard to understand for his disciples, just as it was to the crowd. Were they to take him literally? How would they eat his flesh? Jesus’ answer is in John 6:63.","summary_en":"6:60-61 Jesus’ language (6:53-58) was shocking, offensive (see Gen 9:4-5), and hard to understand for his disciples, just as it was to the crowd. Were they to take him literally? How would they eat his flesh? Jesus’ answer is in John 6:63.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139330,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:60","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:60","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:60-61<\/strong> Jesus’ language (6:53-58) was shocking, offensive (see Gen 9:4-5), and <em>hard to understand<\/em> for his disciples, just as it was to the crowd. Were they to take him literally? How would they eat his flesh? Jesus’ answer is in John 6:63.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:60-61<\/strong> Jesus’ language (6:53-58) was shocking, offensive (see Gen 9:4-5), and <em>hard to understand<\/em> for his disciples, just as it was to the crowd. Were they to take him literally? How would they eat his flesh? Jesus’ answer is in John 6:63.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:60-61 Jesus’ language (6:53-58) was shocking, offensive (see Gen 9:4-5), and hard to understand for his disciples, just as it was to the crowd. Were they to take him literally? How would they eat his flesh? Jesus’ answer is in John 6:63.","summary_en":"6:60-61 Jesus’ language (6:53-58) was shocking, offensive (see Gen 9:4-5), and hard to understand for his disciples, just as it was to the crowd. Were they to take him literally? How would they eat his flesh? Jesus’ answer is in John 6:63.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65176,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","title_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","content_ro":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","summary_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92802,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","title_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","content_ro":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","summary_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120428,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","title_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","content_ro":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","summary_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148054,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","title_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","content_ro":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","summary_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"61":[{"id":28154,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Offense Offend","title_en":"Offense Offend","content_ro":"<h3>OFFEND, OFFENSE<\/h3>\n<p>Words used two ways in the Bible: doing what is wrong oneself, or causing someone else to do wrong or to stumble.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DoingWrong\">Doing Wrong<\/p>\n<p>In both the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT there are several words for sin or wrongdoing having a variety of different translations. With the word “offend” or “offense,” the emphasis is on the sin being against a person or against the law, an offense against either God or man.<\/p>\n<p>Sin is fundamentally an offense against God. For example, the people of Edom had grievously offended in taking vengeance on Judah, and so the hand of the Lord was against them in judgment (Ez 25:12-13). Israel commited an offense in their worship of Baal (Hos 13:1). The breaking of God’s law is spoken of as an “offense committed” (Dt 19:15; cf. 22:26; 25:2). In the NT, James (Jas 2:10; 3:2) speaks of offenses against God and against his law.<\/p>\n<p>There are many passages in the Bible addressing one man’s offense against another: for example, Abraham’s against Abimelech (Gn 20:9), or Pharaoh’s chief butler and chief baker against their master (40:1). Sometimes it is an alleged offense and no actual wrong has been done (e.g., Gn 31:36; 2 Kgs 18:14; Jer 37:18). Paul, in his defense before the Roman governor Festus, said, “Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I offended at all” (Acts 25:8, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the Bible speaks about dealing with real offenses against God and people. Offenses should be acknowledged and confessed (Hos 5:15). One’s proper resolution before God is “I will not offend any more” (Jb 34:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). One needs to make amends for offenses (Eccl 10:4) and to forgive the offenses of others (Prv 17:9; 19:11). Jesus Christ died for our offenses (Rom 4:25; 5:15-21), so that in turning to him there is forgiveness for all sins.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CausingAnothertoSin\">Causing Another to Sin<\/p>\n<p>The noun “offense” and the verb “offend” are also used in reference to a person being caused to stumble or to do what is wrong. There are three ways in which this may happen:<\/p>\n<p>1. There may be something in the individual that causes him or her to stumble. Jesus expressed the seriousness of this, and though speaking metaphorically, he indicated the strenuous steps of prevention (Mt 5:29-30; 18:8-9).<\/p>\n<li>2. There may be something in a person that causes offense to others. Jesus said, “Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!” (Mt 18:7, <span>kjv<\/span>). There are, in fact, many NT passages that insist that one should live so as not to cause others to stumble (Rom 14:13). The apostle Paul says, “Don’t tear apart the work of God over what you eat. Remember, there is nothing wrong with these things in themselves. But it is wrong to eat anything if it makes another person stumble. Don’t eat meat or drink wine or do anything else if it might cause another Christian to stumble” (Rom 14:20-21, <span>nlt<\/span>; cf. 1 Cor 10:32; 2 Cor 6:3).<\/li>\n<li>3. However, people may be offended at the truth through no fault of the person who presents it. Isaiah speaks of God as “a stone that causes people to stumble and a rock that makes them fall” (Is 8:14) in that people would not always accept his demands and the way of faith in him. The NT takes these same words and applies them to the offense of the gospel of Christ (Rom 9:32-33; 1 Pt 2:8). In the time of his ministry there were those who were offended at Jesus—at his lowly birth (Mt 13:57), at what he said and did (15:12), or because of the cost of following him (13:21). Even disciples were capable of being offended and turning aside (Jn 6:61). In the end all were offended and fled from him (Mt 26:31, 56). Finally, the apostle Paul spoke of the offense in the preaching of the cross of Christ. He could have chosen to preach a popular message and avoided persecution, a “message that doesn’t offend anyone” (Gal 5:11). He chose rather to preach the cross even though it was a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles (1 Cor 1:23).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Sin.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OFFEND, OFFENSE<\/h3>\n<p>Words used two ways in the Bible: doing what is wrong oneself, or causing someone else to do wrong or to stumble.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DoingWrong\">Doing Wrong<\/p>\n<p>In both the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT there are several words for sin or wrongdoing having a variety of different translations. With the word “offend” or “offense,” the emphasis is on the sin being against a person or against the law, an offense against either God or man.<\/p>\n<p>Sin is fundamentally an offense against God. For example, the people of Edom had grievously offended in taking vengeance on Judah, and so the hand of the Lord was against them in judgment (Ez 25:12-13). Israel commited an offense in their worship of Baal (Hos 13:1). The breaking of God’s law is spoken of as an “offense committed” (Dt 19:15; cf. 22:26; 25:2). In the NT, James (Jas 2:10; 3:2) speaks of offenses against God and against his law.<\/p>\n<p>There are many passages in the Bible addressing one man’s offense against another: for example, Abraham’s against Abimelech (Gn 20:9), or Pharaoh’s chief butler and chief baker against their master (40:1). Sometimes it is an alleged offense and no actual wrong has been done (e.g., Gn 31:36; 2 Kgs 18:14; Jer 37:18). Paul, in his defense before the Roman governor Festus, said, “Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I offended at all” (Acts 25:8, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the Bible speaks about dealing with real offenses against God and people. Offenses should be acknowledged and confessed (Hos 5:15). One’s proper resolution before God is “I will not offend any more” (Jb 34:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). One needs to make amends for offenses (Eccl 10:4) and to forgive the offenses of others (Prv 17:9; 19:11). Jesus Christ died for our offenses (Rom 4:25; 5:15-21), so that in turning to him there is forgiveness for all sins.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CausingAnothertoSin\">Causing Another to Sin<\/p>\n<p>The noun “offense” and the verb “offend” are also used in reference to a person being caused to stumble or to do what is wrong. There are three ways in which this may happen:<\/p>\n<p>1. There may be something in the individual that causes him or her to stumble. Jesus expressed the seriousness of this, and though speaking metaphorically, he indicated the strenuous steps of prevention (Mt 5:29-30; 18:8-9).<\/p>\n<li>2. There may be something in a person that causes offense to others. Jesus said, “Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!” (Mt 18:7, <span>kjv<\/span>). There are, in fact, many NT passages that insist that one should live so as not to cause others to stumble (Rom 14:13). The apostle Paul says, “Don’t tear apart the work of God over what you eat. Remember, there is nothing wrong with these things in themselves. But it is wrong to eat anything if it makes another person stumble. Don’t eat meat or drink wine or do anything else if it might cause another Christian to stumble” (Rom 14:20-21, <span>nlt<\/span>; cf. 1 Cor 10:32; 2 Cor 6:3).<\/li>\n<li>3. However, people may be offended at the truth through no fault of the person who presents it. Isaiah speaks of God as “a stone that causes people to stumble and a rock that makes them fall” (Is 8:14) in that people would not always accept his demands and the way of faith in him. The NT takes these same words and applies them to the offense of the gospel of Christ (Rom 9:32-33; 1 Pt 2:8). In the time of his ministry there were those who were offended at Jesus—at his lowly birth (Mt 13:57), at what he said and did (15:12), or because of the cost of following him (13:21). Even disciples were capable of being offended and turning aside (Jn 6:61). In the end all were offended and fled from him (Mt 26:31, 56). Finally, the apostle Paul spoke of the offense in the preaching of the cross of Christ. He could have chosen to preach a popular message and avoided persecution, a “message that doesn’t offend anyone” (Gal 5:11). He chose rather to preach the cross even though it was a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles (1 Cor 1:23).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Sin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"OFFEND, OFFENSE Words used two ways in the Bible: doing what is wrong oneself, or causing someone else to do wrong or to stumble. Doing Wrong In both the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT there are several words for sin or wrongdoing having a variety of different translations. With the word “offend” or “offense,” the emphasis is on the sin being against a person or against the law, an offense against either God or man. Sin is fundamentally an offense against God. For example, the peopl...","summary_en":"OFFEND, OFFENSE Words used two ways in the Bible: doing what is wrong oneself, or causing someone else to do wrong or to stumble. Doing Wrong In both the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT there are several words for sin or wrongdoing having a variety of different translations. With the word “offend” or “offense,” the emphasis is on the sin being against a person or against the law, an offense against either God or man. Sin is fundamentally an offense against God. For example, the peopl...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"62":[{"id":11359,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of Christ*, Exaltation","title_en":"of Christ*, Exaltation","content_ro":"<h3>EXALTATION OF CHRIST*<\/h3>\n<p>The glory and dominion which Jesus attained subsequent to the completion of his earthly work of suffering and death. It is at one and the same time the consummation of his redemptive sacrifice and the reward of his full obedience to the will of the Father. The exaltation thus includes the biblical doctrines of Jesus’ resurrection, ascension, and heavenly enthronement.<\/p>\n<p>During his earthly ministry, Jesus predicted not only that he would suffer, die, and be buried (Mt 20:28; Jn 3:14; 6:51; 10:11; etc.) but also that he would thereafter be exalted by the power of the Father to heavenly dominion and glory (Lk 24:26; Jn 17:5). This humiliation-exaltation pattern was plainly indicated by Jesus on the occasion of his encounter with a delegation of proselytes who sought to meet with the Lord (Jn 12:20-36). Jesus far exceeded the expectations of these Greeks by declaring that fellowship with his Father would be extended to the Gentiles in consequence of his imminent passion and resurrection. By affirming, “The hour has come for the Son of man to be glorified” (Jn 12:23, <span>rsv<\/span>), Jesus indicated that he would be endowed with honor and splendor at his exaltation to the presence of the Father in heaven. Jesus’ teaching in respect to his exaltation to heaven provided the foundation for the church’s more explicit teaching on the subject.<\/p>\n<p>The resurrection, the initial event in the exaltation of Jesus, is one of the central affirmations of NT teaching (Acts 2:24, 32; 3:15; 4:10; Rom 1:4; 1 Cor 15:4). From apostolic times Christians have consistently affirmed that at a particular moment in time and in a given place its founder literally passed from a state of death to a state of endless life. The absolute uniqueness of Christ’s exaltation via bodily resurrection from the dead sets Christianity in a class by itself among the religions of the world. A reading of the NT plainly indicates that Jesus openly predicted that death was unable to defeat him. To the skeptical Jews who demanded from Jesus a sign of the authority by which he purged the temple, the Lord answered: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (Jn 2:19, <span>rsv<\/span>). After Peter’s crucial confession of Christ’s divine sonship at Caesarea Philippi, Jesus gave to his followers a more detailed account of the divine plan whereby he would be raised from the dead on the third day (Mt 16:21). To the disciples who assembled in Galilee shortly after his transfiguration, Jesus spoke plainly of his forthcoming exaltation: “The Son of man is to be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill him, and he will be raised on the third day” (17:22-23, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the NT, the apostolic teaching about Christ’s death is almost always accompanied by an emphasis upon the certainty of his physical resurrection after three days.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, the NT writers were careful to spell out the profound theological significance of Christ’s exaltation in resurrection: (1) it demonstrates Christ’s certain power over death and the grave (Acts 2:24; 1 Cor 15:54-56); (2) it confirms the validity of Christ’s teachings, particularly his claims to divine Sonship (Acts 2:36; Rom 1:4); (3) it represents God’s ultimate vindication of his obedient, suffering servant (Phil 2:8-9); (4) it is the means of the justification (Rom 4:25) and regeneration (1 Pt 1:3) of the believer; and (5) it is the guarantee of the future resurrection of the Christian (Rom 6:5; 1 Cor 15:22-24). The effective cause of Christ’s resurrection is declared to be, on one hand, God (Ps 16:10; Acts 2:32; Eph 1:19-20) and, on the other hand, our Lord himself (Jn 2:19; 10:17-18).<\/p>\n<p>The ascension represents the second phase of the exaltation of Christ. According to the two NT historical accounts (Lk 24:50-51; Acts 1:9-11), 40 days after his death Jesus left his disciples for the last time and ascended into heaven. Jesus, who several times in John’s Gospel specifically refers to his ascension (Jn 3:13; 6:62; 14:12; 20:17), regarded the place to which he would depart as an actual locality in the heavenly realm (14:2). In his reflection upon this second stage of the exaltation intimated by Psalm 68:18, the apostle Paul associates the ascension with Christ’s triumph over his foes and the bestowal of spiritual gifts to the church (Eph 4:8). The victor triumphantly returned to his Father’s throne in order to bless his people. In what may be part of an early Christian hymn, Paul explicates what he regards as the supreme “mystery” of the Christian faith, namely, that Christ Jesus who “was manifested in the flesh” was at the close of his life “taken up into glory” (1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Alone among the writings of the NT, the Epistle to the Hebrews associates Christ’s ascension with his high priestly ministry in the heavenly sanctuary. He who steadfastly withstood every earthly trial, having “passed through the heavens,” is fully able to empathize with his people and impart grace to the tempted and distraught (Heb 4:14ff.). Employing the symbolism of the ancient Hebrew sanctuary, the writer conceptualizes the Ascension as the event whereby Christ enters into the inner shrine behind the curtain (6:19), bringing with him his own blood (9:12), to the end that he might appear in the presence of God on our behalf (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The NT thus attributes considerable theological significance to this phase of Christ’s exaltation. By virtue of his exaltation to the Father, Christ (1) demonstrated his defeat of every earthly enemy (Eph 4:8); (2) sent the promised Holy Spirit (Jn 16:7; Acts 2:33), which awaited his glorification (Jn 7:39); and (3) formally undertook his heavenly priestly ministry (Heb 6:20).<\/p>\n<p>The third stage of Christ’s exaltation is his heavenly enthronement at the right hand of the Father. Following his passion, death, resurrection, and ascension to the heavenly realm, Christ is represented in Scripture as having taken his seat at the Father’s right hand. The biblical phrase “right hand of God” (Acts 7:55-56), which has been preserved in many later Christian creeds and confessions, is an anthropomorphism that figuratively describes Christ’s universal dominion, authority, and power in the presence of the Father. This aspect of Christ’s exaltation represents the fulfillment of his prayer recorded in John 17:5: “Now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory I had with you before the world was made.”<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the description of God seated on the throne of the universe is a sign of his sovereignty (1 Kgs 22:19; Ps 99:1), majesty (Is 6:1-4) and holiness (Ps 47:8). That one should be invited to take a seat on the right hand of the sovereign in Eastern cultures was a token of extraordinary honor and authority (1 Kgs 2:19). The fact that the exalted Christ would be accorded this particular privilege was anticipated in the Scriptures of the OT (see Ps 8:5, quoted in Heb 2:8; and see Ps 110:1).<\/p>\n<p>The Epistle to the Hebrews, which shows unusual interest in the doctrine of Christ’s exaltation, represents Christ’s heavenly enthronement both as the sequel to his completed earthly sacrifice and as the commencement of his High Priestly ministration in the sanctuary on high. Affirming the superiority of Christ as High Priest of the new covenant, Hebrews 8:1-2 portrays Christ as seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, a minister in the heavenlies. Christ’s enthronement affirms not only the finality of his earthly work of self-sacrifice but also his newly acquired status as mediator of the new and better covenant. Hebrews 10:11-18 pointedly contrasts the ineffectual sacrifices of the legal priests who <em>stand<\/em> in the performance of their ritual sacrifices with the effectual single sacrifice of Christ, who is now <em>seated<\/em> at the right hand of God as intercessor for the saints.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EXALTATION OF CHRIST*<\/h3>\n<p>The glory and dominion which Jesus attained subsequent to the completion of his earthly work of suffering and death. It is at one and the same time the consummation of his redemptive sacrifice and the reward of his full obedience to the will of the Father. The exaltation thus includes the biblical doctrines of Jesus’ resurrection, ascension, and heavenly enthronement.<\/p>\n<p>During his earthly ministry, Jesus predicted not only that he would suffer, die, and be buried (Mt 20:28; Jn 3:14; 6:51; 10:11; etc.) but also that he would thereafter be exalted by the power of the Father to heavenly dominion and glory (Lk 24:26; Jn 17:5). This humiliation-exaltation pattern was plainly indicated by Jesus on the occasion of his encounter with a delegation of proselytes who sought to meet with the Lord (Jn 12:20-36). Jesus far exceeded the expectations of these Greeks by declaring that fellowship with his Father would be extended to the Gentiles in consequence of his imminent passion and resurrection. By affirming, “The hour has come for the Son of man to be glorified” (Jn 12:23, <span>rsv<\/span>), Jesus indicated that he would be endowed with honor and splendor at his exaltation to the presence of the Father in heaven. Jesus’ teaching in respect to his exaltation to heaven provided the foundation for the church’s more explicit teaching on the subject.<\/p>\n<p>The resurrection, the initial event in the exaltation of Jesus, is one of the central affirmations of NT teaching (Acts 2:24, 32; 3:15; 4:10; Rom 1:4; 1 Cor 15:4). From apostolic times Christians have consistently affirmed that at a particular moment in time and in a given place its founder literally passed from a state of death to a state of endless life. The absolute uniqueness of Christ’s exaltation via bodily resurrection from the dead sets Christianity in a class by itself among the religions of the world. A reading of the NT plainly indicates that Jesus openly predicted that death was unable to defeat him. To the skeptical Jews who demanded from Jesus a sign of the authority by which he purged the temple, the Lord answered: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (Jn 2:19, <span>rsv<\/span>). After Peter’s crucial confession of Christ’s divine sonship at Caesarea Philippi, Jesus gave to his followers a more detailed account of the divine plan whereby he would be raised from the dead on the third day (Mt 16:21). To the disciples who assembled in Galilee shortly after his transfiguration, Jesus spoke plainly of his forthcoming exaltation: “The Son of man is to be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill him, and he will be raised on the third day” (17:22-23, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the NT, the apostolic teaching about Christ’s death is almost always accompanied by an emphasis upon the certainty of his physical resurrection after three days.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, the NT writers were careful to spell out the profound theological significance of Christ’s exaltation in resurrection: (1) it demonstrates Christ’s certain power over death and the grave (Acts 2:24; 1 Cor 15:54-56); (2) it confirms the validity of Christ’s teachings, particularly his claims to divine Sonship (Acts 2:36; Rom 1:4); (3) it represents God’s ultimate vindication of his obedient, suffering servant (Phil 2:8-9); (4) it is the means of the justification (Rom 4:25) and regeneration (1 Pt 1:3) of the believer; and (5) it is the guarantee of the future resurrection of the Christian (Rom 6:5; 1 Cor 15:22-24). The effective cause of Christ’s resurrection is declared to be, on one hand, God (Ps 16:10; Acts 2:32; Eph 1:19-20) and, on the other hand, our Lord himself (Jn 2:19; 10:17-18).<\/p>\n<p>The ascension represents the second phase of the exaltation of Christ. According to the two NT historical accounts (Lk 24:50-51; Acts 1:9-11), 40 days after his death Jesus left his disciples for the last time and ascended into heaven. Jesus, who several times in John’s Gospel specifically refers to his ascension (Jn 3:13; 6:62; 14:12; 20:17), regarded the place to which he would depart as an actual locality in the heavenly realm (14:2). In his reflection upon this second stage of the exaltation intimated by Psalm 68:18, the apostle Paul associates the ascension with Christ’s triumph over his foes and the bestowal of spiritual gifts to the church (Eph 4:8). The victor triumphantly returned to his Father’s throne in order to bless his people. In what may be part of an early Christian hymn, Paul explicates what he regards as the supreme “mystery” of the Christian faith, namely, that Christ Jesus who “was manifested in the flesh” was at the close of his life “taken up into glory” (1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Alone among the writings of the NT, the Epistle to the Hebrews associates Christ’s ascension with his high priestly ministry in the heavenly sanctuary. He who steadfastly withstood every earthly trial, having “passed through the heavens,” is fully able to empathize with his people and impart grace to the tempted and distraught (Heb 4:14ff.). Employing the symbolism of the ancient Hebrew sanctuary, the writer conceptualizes the Ascension as the event whereby Christ enters into the inner shrine behind the curtain (6:19), bringing with him his own blood (9:12), to the end that he might appear in the presence of God on our behalf (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The NT thus attributes considerable theological significance to this phase of Christ’s exaltation. By virtue of his exaltation to the Father, Christ (1) demonstrated his defeat of every earthly enemy (Eph 4:8); (2) sent the promised Holy Spirit (Jn 16:7; Acts 2:33), which awaited his glorification (Jn 7:39); and (3) formally undertook his heavenly priestly ministry (Heb 6:20).<\/p>\n<p>The third stage of Christ’s exaltation is his heavenly enthronement at the right hand of the Father. Following his passion, death, resurrection, and ascension to the heavenly realm, Christ is represented in Scripture as having taken his seat at the Father’s right hand. The biblical phrase “right hand of God” (Acts 7:55-56), which has been preserved in many later Christian creeds and confessions, is an anthropomorphism that figuratively describes Christ’s universal dominion, authority, and power in the presence of the Father. This aspect of Christ’s exaltation represents the fulfillment of his prayer recorded in John 17:5: “Now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory I had with you before the world was made.”<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the description of God seated on the throne of the universe is a sign of his sovereignty (1 Kgs 22:19; Ps 99:1), majesty (Is 6:1-4) and holiness (Ps 47:8). That one should be invited to take a seat on the right hand of the sovereign in Eastern cultures was a token of extraordinary honor and authority (1 Kgs 2:19). The fact that the exalted Christ would be accorded this particular privilege was anticipated in the Scriptures of the OT (see Ps 8:5, quoted in Heb 2:8; and see Ps 110:1).<\/p>\n<p>The Epistle to the Hebrews, which shows unusual interest in the doctrine of Christ’s exaltation, represents Christ’s heavenly enthronement both as the sequel to his completed earthly sacrifice and as the commencement of his High Priestly ministration in the sanctuary on high. Affirming the superiority of Christ as High Priest of the new covenant, Hebrews 8:1-2 portrays Christ as seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, a minister in the heavenlies. Christ’s enthronement affirms not only the finality of his earthly work of self-sacrifice but also his newly acquired status as mediator of the new and better covenant. Hebrews 10:11-18 pointedly contrasts the ineffectual sacrifices of the legal priests who <em>stand<\/em> in the performance of their ritual sacrifices with the effectual single sacrifice of Christ, who is now <em>seated<\/em> at the right hand of God as intercessor for the saints.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EXALTATION OF CHRIST* The glory and dominion which Jesus attained subsequent to the completion of his earthly work of suffering and death. It is at one and the same time the consummation of his redemptive sacrifice and the reward of his full obedience to the will of the Father. The exaltation thus includes the biblical doctrines of Jesus’ resurrection, ascension, and heavenly enthronement. During his earthly ministry, Jesus predicted not only that he would suffer, die, and be buried (Mt 20:28...","summary_en":"EXALTATION OF CHRIST* The glory and dominion which Jesus attained subsequent to the completion of his earthly work of suffering and death. It is at one and the same time the consummation of his redemptive sacrifice and the reward of his full obedience to the will of the Father. The exaltation thus includes the biblical doctrines of Jesus’ resurrection, ascension, and heavenly enthronement. During his earthly ministry, Jesus predicted not only that he would suffer, die, and be buried (Mt 20:28...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35889,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Son of Man","title_en":"Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","summary_en":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64988,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66122,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Ascension","title_en":"Jesus’ Ascension","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Ascension<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ ascension into heaven was a final commissioning service for the apostles (Acts 1:6-11; Luke 24:45-53). The ascension marks the beginning of the powerful ministry of the Holy Spirit through the church (Luke 24:49).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s ascension to heaven indicates his elevation to ultimate power and authority (Eph 1:19-23; Phil 2:9-11). That Jesus was going to the Father is noted in other places (John 6:62; 13:1-3; 13:31–14:3, 14:28; 16:5-10, 16, 28; 20:17; Eph 4:8-10). It occurred at the last of Jesus’ physical appearances; after this he would remain in heaven until the “final restoration of all things” (Acts 3:21).<\/p>\n<p>The ascension reminds believers of Jesus’ promised return (Acts 1:11; see Matt 24:30; Mark 13:26; John 14:3). The witnesses of the ascension went back to Jerusalem with joy and exhilaration, in praise and worship of Christ (Luke 24:52). They were convinced that their Lord would return again, physically and personally (1 Thes 4:16; 2 Thes 1:7-10; 2 Pet 3:10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ ascension anticipates the believer’s own glorious entrance into the presence of God, where Jesus has gone to prepare the way (John 14:1-3; 2 Cor 5:4; Phil 3:21; Heb 6:19-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 24:30; Mark 13:26; Luke 24:45-53; John 6:62; 13:1-3; 14:1-4, 27-28; 16:10, 16, 28; 20:17; Acts 1:6-11; 3:20; 7:54-56; 2 Cor 5:4; Eph 1:19-23; 4:8-10; Phil 2:9-11; Heb 6:19-20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Ascension<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ ascension into heaven was a final commissioning service for the apostles (Acts 1:6-11; Luke 24:45-53). The ascension marks the beginning of the powerful ministry of the Holy Spirit through the church (Luke 24:49).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s ascension to heaven indicates his elevation to ultimate power and authority (Eph 1:19-23; Phil 2:9-11). That Jesus was going to the Father is noted in other places (John 6:62; 13:1-3; 13:31–14:3, 14:28; 16:5-10, 16, 28; 20:17; Eph 4:8-10). It occurred at the last of Jesus’ physical appearances; after this he would remain in heaven until the “final restoration of all things” (Acts 3:21).<\/p>\n<p>The ascension reminds believers of Jesus’ promised return (Acts 1:11; see Matt 24:30; Mark 13:26; John 14:3). The witnesses of the ascension went back to Jerusalem with joy and exhilaration, in praise and worship of Christ (Luke 24:52). They were convinced that their Lord would return again, physically and personally (1 Thes 4:16; 2 Thes 1:7-10; 2 Pet 3:10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ ascension anticipates the believer’s own glorious entrance into the presence of God, where Jesus has gone to prepare the way (John 14:1-3; 2 Cor 5:4; Phil 3:21; Heb 6:19-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 24:30; Mark 13:26; Luke 24:45-53; John 6:62; 13:1-3; 14:1-4, 27-28; 16:10, 16, 28; 20:17; Acts 1:6-11; 3:20; 7:54-56; 2 Cor 5:4; Eph 1:19-23; 4:8-10; Phil 2:9-11; Heb 6:19-20<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Ascension Jesus’ ascension into heaven was a final commissioning service for the apostles (Acts 1:6-11; Luke 24:45-53). The ascension marks the beginning of the powerful ministry of the Holy Spirit through the church (Luke 24:49). Christ’s ascension to heaven indicates his elevation to ultimate power and authority (Eph 1:19-23; Phil 2:9-11). That Jesus was going to the Father is noted in other places (John 6:62; 13:1-3; 13:31–14:3, 14:28; 16:5-10, 16, 28; 20:17; Eph 4:8-10). It occurre...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Ascension Jesus’ ascension into heaven was a final commissioning service for the apostles (Acts 1:6-11; Luke 24:45-53). The ascension marks the beginning of the powerful ministry of the Holy Spirit through the church (Luke 24:49). Christ’s ascension to heaven indicates his elevation to ultimate power and authority (Eph 1:19-23; Phil 2:9-11). That Jesus was going to the Father is noted in other places (John 6:62; 13:1-3; 13:31–14:3, 14:28; 16:5-10, 16, 28; 20:17; Eph 4:8-10). It occurre...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92614,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93748,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Ascension","title_en":"Jesus’ Ascension","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Ascension<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ ascension into heaven was a final commissioning service for the apostles (Acts 1:6-11; Luke 24:45-53). The ascension marks the beginning of the powerful ministry of the Holy Spirit through the church (Luke 24:49).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s ascension to heaven indicates his elevation to ultimate power and authority (Eph 1:19-23; Phil 2:9-11). That Jesus was going to the Father is noted in other places (John 6:62; 13:1-3; 13:31–14:3, 14:28; 16:5-10, 16, 28; 20:17; Eph 4:8-10). It occurred at the last of Jesus’ physical appearances; after this he would remain in heaven until the “final restoration of all things” (Acts 3:21).<\/p>\n<p>The ascension reminds believers of Jesus’ promised return (Acts 1:11; see Matt 24:30; Mark 13:26; John 14:3). The witnesses of the ascension went back to Jerusalem with joy and exhilaration, in praise and worship of Christ (Luke 24:52). They were convinced that their Lord would return again, physically and personally (1 Thes 4:16; 2 Thes 1:7-10; 2 Pet 3:10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ ascension anticipates the believer’s own glorious entrance into the presence of God, where Jesus has gone to prepare the way (John 14:1-3; 2 Cor 5:4; Phil 3:21; Heb 6:19-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 24:30; Mark 13:26; Luke 24:45-53; John 6:62; 13:1-3; 14:1-4, 27-28; 16:10, 16, 28; 20:17; Acts 1:6-11; 3:20; 7:54-56; 2 Cor 5:4; Eph 1:19-23; 4:8-10; Phil 2:9-11; Heb 6:19-20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Ascension<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ ascension into heaven was a final commissioning service for the apostles (Acts 1:6-11; Luke 24:45-53). The ascension marks the beginning of the powerful ministry of the Holy Spirit through the church (Luke 24:49).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s ascension to heaven indicates his elevation to ultimate power and authority (Eph 1:19-23; Phil 2:9-11). That Jesus was going to the Father is noted in other places (John 6:62; 13:1-3; 13:31–14:3, 14:28; 16:5-10, 16, 28; 20:17; Eph 4:8-10). It occurred at the last of Jesus’ physical appearances; after this he would remain in heaven until the “final restoration of all things” (Acts 3:21).<\/p>\n<p>The ascension reminds believers of Jesus’ promised return (Acts 1:11; see Matt 24:30; Mark 13:26; John 14:3). The witnesses of the ascension went back to Jerusalem with joy and exhilaration, in praise and worship of Christ (Luke 24:52). They were convinced that their Lord would return again, physically and personally (1 Thes 4:16; 2 Thes 1:7-10; 2 Pet 3:10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ ascension anticipates the believer’s own glorious entrance into the presence of God, where Jesus has gone to prepare the way (John 14:1-3; 2 Cor 5:4; Phil 3:21; Heb 6:19-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 24:30; Mark 13:26; Luke 24:45-53; John 6:62; 13:1-3; 14:1-4, 27-28; 16:10, 16, 28; 20:17; Acts 1:6-11; 3:20; 7:54-56; 2 Cor 5:4; Eph 1:19-23; 4:8-10; Phil 2:9-11; Heb 6:19-20<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Ascension Jesus’ ascension into heaven was a final commissioning service for the apostles (Acts 1:6-11; Luke 24:45-53). The ascension marks the beginning of the powerful ministry of the Holy Spirit through the church (Luke 24:49). Christ’s ascension to heaven indicates his elevation to ultimate power and authority (Eph 1:19-23; Phil 2:9-11). That Jesus was going to the Father is noted in other places (John 6:62; 13:1-3; 13:31–14:3, 14:28; 16:5-10, 16, 28; 20:17; Eph 4:8-10). It occurre...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Ascension Jesus’ ascension into heaven was a final commissioning service for the apostles (Acts 1:6-11; Luke 24:45-53). The ascension marks the beginning of the powerful ministry of the Holy Spirit through the church (Luke 24:49). Christ’s ascension to heaven indicates his elevation to ultimate power and authority (Eph 1:19-23; Phil 2:9-11). That Jesus was going to the Father is noted in other places (John 6:62; 13:1-3; 13:31–14:3, 14:28; 16:5-10, 16, 28; 20:17; Eph 4:8-10). It occurre...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120240,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121374,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Ascension","title_en":"Jesus’ Ascension","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Ascension<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ ascension into heaven was a final commissioning service for the apostles (Acts 1:6-11; Luke 24:45-53). The ascension marks the beginning of the powerful ministry of the Holy Spirit through the church (Luke 24:49).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s ascension to heaven indicates his elevation to ultimate power and authority (Eph 1:19-23; Phil 2:9-11). That Jesus was going to the Father is noted in other places (John 6:62; 13:1-3; 13:31–14:3, 14:28; 16:5-10, 16, 28; 20:17; Eph 4:8-10). It occurred at the last of Jesus’ physical appearances; after this he would remain in heaven until the “final restoration of all things” (Acts 3:21).<\/p>\n<p>The ascension reminds believers of Jesus’ promised return (Acts 1:11; see Matt 24:30; Mark 13:26; John 14:3). The witnesses of the ascension went back to Jerusalem with joy and exhilaration, in praise and worship of Christ (Luke 24:52). They were convinced that their Lord would return again, physically and personally (1 Thes 4:16; 2 Thes 1:7-10; 2 Pet 3:10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ ascension anticipates the believer’s own glorious entrance into the presence of God, where Jesus has gone to prepare the way (John 14:1-3; 2 Cor 5:4; Phil 3:21; Heb 6:19-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 24:30; Mark 13:26; Luke 24:45-53; John 6:62; 13:1-3; 14:1-4, 27-28; 16:10, 16, 28; 20:17; Acts 1:6-11; 3:20; 7:54-56; 2 Cor 5:4; Eph 1:19-23; 4:8-10; Phil 2:9-11; Heb 6:19-20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Ascension<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ ascension into heaven was a final commissioning service for the apostles (Acts 1:6-11; Luke 24:45-53). The ascension marks the beginning of the powerful ministry of the Holy Spirit through the church (Luke 24:49).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s ascension to heaven indicates his elevation to ultimate power and authority (Eph 1:19-23; Phil 2:9-11). That Jesus was going to the Father is noted in other places (John 6:62; 13:1-3; 13:31–14:3, 14:28; 16:5-10, 16, 28; 20:17; Eph 4:8-10). It occurred at the last of Jesus’ physical appearances; after this he would remain in heaven until the “final restoration of all things” (Acts 3:21).<\/p>\n<p>The ascension reminds believers of Jesus’ promised return (Acts 1:11; see Matt 24:30; Mark 13:26; John 14:3). The witnesses of the ascension went back to Jerusalem with joy and exhilaration, in praise and worship of Christ (Luke 24:52). They were convinced that their Lord would return again, physically and personally (1 Thes 4:16; 2 Thes 1:7-10; 2 Pet 3:10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ ascension anticipates the believer’s own glorious entrance into the presence of God, where Jesus has gone to prepare the way (John 14:1-3; 2 Cor 5:4; Phil 3:21; Heb 6:19-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 24:30; Mark 13:26; Luke 24:45-53; John 6:62; 13:1-3; 14:1-4, 27-28; 16:10, 16, 28; 20:17; Acts 1:6-11; 3:20; 7:54-56; 2 Cor 5:4; Eph 1:19-23; 4:8-10; Phil 2:9-11; Heb 6:19-20<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Ascension Jesus’ ascension into heaven was a final commissioning service for the apostles (Acts 1:6-11; Luke 24:45-53). The ascension marks the beginning of the powerful ministry of the Holy Spirit through the church (Luke 24:49). Christ’s ascension to heaven indicates his elevation to ultimate power and authority (Eph 1:19-23; Phil 2:9-11). That Jesus was going to the Father is noted in other places (John 6:62; 13:1-3; 13:31–14:3, 14:28; 16:5-10, 16, 28; 20:17; Eph 4:8-10). It occurre...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Ascension Jesus’ ascension into heaven was a final commissioning service for the apostles (Acts 1:6-11; Luke 24:45-53). The ascension marks the beginning of the powerful ministry of the Holy Spirit through the church (Luke 24:49). Christ’s ascension to heaven indicates his elevation to ultimate power and authority (Eph 1:19-23; Phil 2:9-11). That Jesus was going to the Father is noted in other places (John 6:62; 13:1-3; 13:31–14:3, 14:28; 16:5-10, 16, 28; 20:17; Eph 4:8-10). It occurre...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147866,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149000,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Ascension","title_en":"Jesus’ Ascension","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Ascension<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ ascension into heaven was a final commissioning service for the apostles (Acts 1:6-11; Luke 24:45-53). The ascension marks the beginning of the powerful ministry of the Holy Spirit through the church (Luke 24:49).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s ascension to heaven indicates his elevation to ultimate power and authority (Eph 1:19-23; Phil 2:9-11). That Jesus was going to the Father is noted in other places (John 6:62; 13:1-3; 13:31–14:3, 14:28; 16:5-10, 16, 28; 20:17; Eph 4:8-10). It occurred at the last of Jesus’ physical appearances; after this he would remain in heaven until the “final restoration of all things” (Acts 3:21).<\/p>\n<p>The ascension reminds believers of Jesus’ promised return (Acts 1:11; see Matt 24:30; Mark 13:26; John 14:3). The witnesses of the ascension went back to Jerusalem with joy and exhilaration, in praise and worship of Christ (Luke 24:52). They were convinced that their Lord would return again, physically and personally (1 Thes 4:16; 2 Thes 1:7-10; 2 Pet 3:10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ ascension anticipates the believer’s own glorious entrance into the presence of God, where Jesus has gone to prepare the way (John 14:1-3; 2 Cor 5:4; Phil 3:21; Heb 6:19-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 24:30; Mark 13:26; Luke 24:45-53; John 6:62; 13:1-3; 14:1-4, 27-28; 16:10, 16, 28; 20:17; Acts 1:6-11; 3:20; 7:54-56; 2 Cor 5:4; Eph 1:19-23; 4:8-10; Phil 2:9-11; Heb 6:19-20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Ascension<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ ascension into heaven was a final commissioning service for the apostles (Acts 1:6-11; Luke 24:45-53). The ascension marks the beginning of the powerful ministry of the Holy Spirit through the church (Luke 24:49).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s ascension to heaven indicates his elevation to ultimate power and authority (Eph 1:19-23; Phil 2:9-11). That Jesus was going to the Father is noted in other places (John 6:62; 13:1-3; 13:31–14:3, 14:28; 16:5-10, 16, 28; 20:17; Eph 4:8-10). It occurred at the last of Jesus’ physical appearances; after this he would remain in heaven until the “final restoration of all things” (Acts 3:21).<\/p>\n<p>The ascension reminds believers of Jesus’ promised return (Acts 1:11; see Matt 24:30; Mark 13:26; John 14:3). The witnesses of the ascension went back to Jerusalem with joy and exhilaration, in praise and worship of Christ (Luke 24:52). They were convinced that their Lord would return again, physically and personally (1 Thes 4:16; 2 Thes 1:7-10; 2 Pet 3:10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ ascension anticipates the believer’s own glorious entrance into the presence of God, where Jesus has gone to prepare the way (John 14:1-3; 2 Cor 5:4; Phil 3:21; Heb 6:19-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 24:30; Mark 13:26; Luke 24:45-53; John 6:62; 13:1-3; 14:1-4, 27-28; 16:10, 16, 28; 20:17; Acts 1:6-11; 3:20; 7:54-56; 2 Cor 5:4; Eph 1:19-23; 4:8-10; Phil 2:9-11; Heb 6:19-20<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Ascension Jesus’ ascension into heaven was a final commissioning service for the apostles (Acts 1:6-11; Luke 24:45-53). The ascension marks the beginning of the powerful ministry of the Holy Spirit through the church (Luke 24:49). Christ’s ascension to heaven indicates his elevation to ultimate power and authority (Eph 1:19-23; Phil 2:9-11). That Jesus was going to the Father is noted in other places (John 6:62; 13:1-3; 13:31–14:3, 14:28; 16:5-10, 16, 28; 20:17; Eph 4:8-10). It occurre...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Ascension Jesus’ ascension into heaven was a final commissioning service for the apostles (Acts 1:6-11; Luke 24:45-53). The ascension marks the beginning of the powerful ministry of the Holy Spirit through the church (Luke 24:49). Christ’s ascension to heaven indicates his elevation to ultimate power and authority (Eph 1:19-23; Phil 2:9-11). That Jesus was going to the Father is noted in other places (John 6:62; 13:1-3; 13:31–14:3, 14:28; 16:5-10, 16, 28; 20:17; Eph 4:8-10). It occurre...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"63":[{"id":19663,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","title_en":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":36155,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Spirit of God","title_en":"Spirit of God","content_ro":"<h3>SPIRIT OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ruach<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span>) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy.<\/p>\n<p>First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translated “Spirit” in Gn 1:2) that caused the waters of the Flood to subside (8:1). A wind from God blew locusts over Egypt (Ex 10:13) and quail over the camp of Israel. The blast of his nostrils separated the waters of the Red Sea at the exodus (14:21).<\/p>\n<p>Second, it was the breath of God that made man a living being (Gn 2:7). It is one of the earliest perceptions of Hebrew faith that humans live only because of the stirring of the divine breath or spirit within them (Gn 6:3; Jb 33:4; 34:14-15; Ps 104:29-30). Later, a clearer distinction was drawn between divine Spirit and human spirit, and between spirit and soul, but at the earliest stage these were all more or less perceived to be synonymous manifestations of the same divine power, the source of all life—animal as well as human (Gn 7:15, 22; see Eccl 3:19-21).<\/p>\n<p>Third, there were occasions when this divine power seemed to overtake and possess an individual fully, so that his or her words or actions far transcended those of normal behavior. Such a person was clearly marked as an agent of God’s purpose and given respect. This was apparently how leaders were recognized in the premonarchy period—Othniel (Jgs 3:10), Gideon (6:34), Jephthah (11:29), and the first king, Saul (1 Sm 11:6), as well. So, too, the earliest prophets were those whose inspiration came in ecstasy (1 Sm 19:20-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the earlier stages of Hebrew thought, ecstatic experience was seen as the direct effect of divine power. This was true even when the ecstasy was recognized as evil in character, as in the case of Saul’s seizure by the Spirit (1 Sm 16:14-16). A spirit from God could be for evil as well as for good (see Jgs 9:23; 1 Kgs 22:19-23).<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of the Prophets<\/h5>\n<p>For Isaiah, the spirit was that which characterized God and distinguished him and his actions from human affairs (Is 31:3). Later, the adjective “holy” appeared as that which distinguished the Spirit of God from any other spirit, human or divine (Ps 51:11; Is 63:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>The problem of false prophecy emphasized the danger of assuming that every message delivered in ecstasy was the word of the Lord. Thus, tests of prophecy evaluated the content of the message delivered or the character of the prophet’s life, not the degree or quality of inspiration (see Dt 13:1-5; 18:22; Jer 23:14; Mi 3:5). This sense of a need to discriminate between true and false inspiration and to distinguish the word of God from the merely ecstatic oracle may help to explain the otherwise puzzling reluctance of the major eighth- and seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> prophets to attribute their inspiration to the Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Exilic and Postexilic Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In exilic and postexilic literature, the role of the Spirit is narrowed to two major functions: that of the prophetic Spirit and that of the Spirit of the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets again spoke of the Spirit in explicit terms as the inspirer of prophecy (see Ez 3:1-4, 22-24; Hg 2:5; Zec 4:6). As they looked back to the preexilic period, these prophets freely attributed the inspiration of “the former prophets” to the Spirit as well (Zec 7:12).<\/p>\n<p>This tendency to exalt the Spirit’s role as the inspirer of prophecy became steadily stronger in the period between the OT and NT, until in rabbinic Judaism the Spirit was almost exclusively the inspirer of the prophetic writings now regarded as Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The other understanding of the Spirit’s role during exilic and postexilic times was that the Spirit would be the manifestation of the power of God in the age to come. That eschatological hope of divine power effecting a final cleansing and a renewed creation is rooted principally in Isaiah’s prophecies (Is 4:4; 32:15; 44:3-4). Isaiah speaks of one anointed by the Spirit to accomplish complete and final salvation (11:2; 42:1; 61:1). Elsewhere, the same longing is expressed in terms of the Spirit being freely dispensed to all Israel (Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28-29; Zec 12:10) in the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34; Ez 36:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>In the period prior to Jesus, the understanding of the Spirit as the Spirit of prophecy and as the Spirit of the age to come had developed into the widespread dogma that the Spirit was no longer to be experienced in the present. The Spirit had been known in the past as the inspirer of prophetic writings, but after Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, the Spirit had withdrawn (1 Macc 4:44-46; 9:27; 2 Bar 85:1-3; see also Ps 74:9; Zec 13:2-6). The Spirit would be known again in the age of the Messiah, but in the interim the Spirit was absent from Israel. Even the great Hillel (learned Jewish leader and teacher, 60? <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 20?), a near contemporary of Jesus, had not received the Spirit—though if anyone was worthy of the Spirit, it was he. There is a tradition that at a meeting of Hillel and other wise men, a voice from heaven said, “Among those here present is one who would have deserved the Holy Spirit to rest upon him, if his time had been worthy of it.” The wise men all looked at Hillel.<\/p>\n<p>The consequence of this accepted dearth of the Spirit was that the Spirit in effect became subordinated to the law. The Spirit was the inspirer of the law, but since the Spirit could no longer be experienced directly, the law became the sole voice of the Spirit. It was this increasing dominance of the law and its authoritative interpreters that provided the background for the mission of Jesus and the initial spread of Christianity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>If we are to understand the NT’s teaching on the Spirit, we must recognize both its continuity and discontinuity with the OT. At many points NT usage cannot be fully understood except against the background of OT concepts or passages. For example, the ambiguity of John 3:8 (“wind,” “Spirit”), 2 Thessalonians 2:8 (“breath”), and Revelation 11:11 (“breath of life”) takes us back to the basic Hebrew meanings of “spirit.” Acts 8:39 and Revelation 17:3 and 21:10 reflect the same conception of the Spirit that we find in 1 Kings 18:12, 2 Kings 2:16, and Ezekiel 3:14. The NT writers generally share the rabbinic view that Scripture has the authority of the Spirit behind it (see Mk 12:36; Acts 28:25; Heb 3:7; 2 Pt 1:21). The principal continuity is that the NT brings the fulfillment of what the OT writers looked forward to. At the same time, Christianity is not simply fulfilled Judaism. Jesus’ coming and his giving of his Spirit to live within his believers marks off the new faith as something new and distinct.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of the New Age<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of Jesus’ ministry and of the message of the earliest Christians was their conviction and proclamation that the blessings of the new age were already present, that the eschatological Spirit had already been poured out. With the exception of the Essenes at Qumran, no other group or individual within the Jewish religion of that time had dared to make such a bold claim. The prophets and the rabbis looked for a messianic age yet to come, and the apocalyptic writers warned of its imminent arrival, but none thought of it as already present. Even John the Baptist spoke only of one about to come and of the Spirit’s operation in the imminent future (Mk 1:8). But for Jesus and first-century Christians, the longed for hope was a living reality, and the claim carried with it the exciting sense of being in “the last days.” Without some recognition of that eschatological dimension of the Christians’ faith and life, we cannot understand this teaching on, and experience of, the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly thought of his teachings and healings as fulfillment of the prophetic hope (Mt 12:41-42; 13:16-17; Lk 17:20-21). In particular, he saw himself as the one anointed by the Spirit to provide salvation (Mt 5:3-6; 11:5; Lk 4:17-19). So, too, Jesus understood his exorcisms as the effect of the power of God and as manifestations of the end-time rule of God (Mt 12:27-28; Mk 3:22-26). The Gospel writers, especially Luke, emphasize the eschatological character of Jesus’ life and ministry by stressing the role of the Spirit in his birth (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:35, 41, 67; 2:25-27), his baptism (Mk 1:9-10; Acts 10:38), and his ministry (Mt 4:1; 12:18; Mk 1:12; Lk 4:1, 14; 10:21; Jn 3:34).<\/p>\n<p>The Christian church began with the in-breathing of the Holy Spirit on the day of Christ’s resurrection (Jn 20:22), followed by the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost “in the last days.” The overwhelming experience of vision and inspired utterance was taken as proof positive that the new age prophesied by Joel had now arrived (Acts 2:2-5, 17-18). Similarly, in Hebrews the gift of the Spirit is spoken of as “the powers of the age to come” (Heb 6:4-5). More striking still is Paul’s understanding of the Spirit as the guarantee of God’s complete salvation (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14), and as the first installment of the believer’s inheritance of God’s kingdom (Rom 8:15-17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:42-50; Gal 4:6-7; 5:16-18, 21-23; Eph 1:13-14). The Spirit is here again thought of as the power of the age to come, as that power (which will characterize God’s rule at the end of time) already shaping and transforming the lives of believers.<\/p>\n<p>For Paul, this means also that the gift of the Spirit is but the beginning of a lifelong process that will not end until the believer’s whole person is brought under the Spirit’s power (Rom 8:11, 23; 1 Cor 15:44-49; 2 Cor 3:18; 5:1-5). It also means that the present experience of faith is one of lifelong tension between what God has already begun to bring about in the believer’s life and what has not yet been brought under God’s grace (Phil 1:6). It is this tension between life “in the Spirit” and life “in the flesh” (see Gal 2:20) that comes to poignant expression in Romans 7:24 and 2 Corinthians 5:2-4.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of New Life<\/h5>\n<p>Since the Spirit is the mark of the new age, it is not surprising that the NT writers understood the gift of the Spirit to be that which brings an individual into the new age. John the Baptist described the way the coming one would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Mt 3:11). According to Acts 1:5 and 11:16, this imagery was taken up by Jesus, and the promise is seen as fulfilled at Pentecost—the outpouring of the Spirit here being understood as the risen Christ’s action in drawing his disciples into the new age (Acts 2:17, 33).<\/p>\n<p>It seems to be one of Luke’s aims in the book of Acts to highlight the central importance of the gift of the Spirit in conversion-initiation—it is that decisive “gift of the Holy Spirit” that makes one a Christian (Acts 2:38-39). People could have been followers of Jesus on earth, but it was only when they received the gift of the Spirit that they could be said to have “believed in the Lord Jesus Christ” (11:16-17). When the Spirit’s presence was manifested in and upon a person’s life, that was recognized by Peter as proof enough that God had accepted that person, even though he or she had not yet made any formal profession of faith or been baptized (10:44-48; 11:15-18; 15:7-9). So too Apollos, already aglow with the Spirit (18:25), even though his knowledge of “the way of God” was slightly defective (vv 24-26), apparently was not required to supplement his “baptism of John” with Christian baptism. However, the 12 so-called disciples at Ephesus proved by their very ignorance of the Spirit that they were not yet disciples of the Lord Jesus (19:1-6). Paul asked these 12 men, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” (19:2).<\/p>\n<p>This accords with Paul’s emphasis in his letters. Belief and reception of the Spirit go together: to receive the Spirit is to begin the Christian life (Gal 3:2-3); to be baptized in the Spirit is to become a member of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:13); to “have the Spirit of Christ” is to belong to Christ (Rom 8:9-11); to receive the Spirit is tantamount to becoming a child of God (Rom 8:14-17; Gal 4:6-7). The Spirit so characterizes the new age and the life of the new age that only the gift of the Spirit can bring a person into the new age to experience the life of the new age. For the Spirit is distinctively and peculiarly the life-giver; the Spirit indeed <em>is<\/em> the life of the new age (Rom 8:2, 6, 10; 1 Cor 15:45; 2 Cor 3:6; Gal 5:25).<\/p>\n<p>In just the same way in John’s writings, the Spirit is characteristically the life-giving Spirit (Jn 6:63), the power from above, the seed of divine life that brings about the new birth (Jn 3:3-8; 1 Jn 3:9), and a river of living water that brings life when one believes in Christ (Jn 7:37-39; so also 4:10, 14). Or again, reception of the Spirit in John 20:22 is depicted as a new creation analogous to Genesis 2:7. Consequently, in 1 John 3:24 and 4:13, possession and experience of the Spirit count as one of the “tests of life” listed in that letter.<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It will be clear from what has already been said that when the first Christians, like the ancient Hebrews, spoke of the Spirit, they were thinking of experiences of divine power. In the NT, as in the OT, “Spirit” is the word used to explain the experience of new life and vitality (see above), of liberation from legalism (e.g., Rom 8:2; 2 Cor 3:17), of spiritual refreshing and renewal (cf. e.g., Is 32:15; Ez 39:29 with Jn 7:37-39; Rom 5:5; 1 Cor 12:13; 1 Tm 3:5-6). It is important to realize how wide a range of experiences were attributed to the Spirit: ecstatic experiences (Acts 2:24; 10:43-47; 19:6; cf. 10:10; 22:17—“in ecstasy”; 2 Cor 12:1-4; Rv 1:10), emotional experiences (e.g., love—Rom 5:5; joy—Acts 13:52; 1 Thes 1:6; see also Gal 5:22; Phil 2:1-2), experiences of illumination (2 Cor 3:14-17; Eph 1:17-18; Heb 6:4-5; 1 Jn 2:20-21), and experiences issuing in moral transformation (1 Cor 6:9-11). Likewise, when Paul speaks of spiritual gifts, called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">charismata<\/span> (acts or words that bring divine grace to concrete expression), he evidently has a wide range of actual events in mind: inspired speech (1 Cor 12:8-10; 1 Thes 1:5), miracles and healings (1 Cor 12:9; Gal 3:5; cf. Heb 2:4), and various acts of service and help, of counsel and administration, and of aid and mercy (Rom 12:7-8; 1 Cor 12:28).<\/p>\n<p>In talking thus of the Spirit in terms of experience, we should not overemphasize particular experiences or manifestations, as though earliest Christianity consisted of a sequence of mountaintop experiences or spiritual highs. There clearly were such experiences, indeed a wide range of experiences, but no one experience is singled out to be sought by all (except prophecy). There is no distinctively second (or third) experience of the Spirit in the NT, and Paul warned against overvaluing particular manifestations of the Spirit (1 Cor 14:6-19; 2 Cor 12:1-10; cf. Mk 8:11-13). Where particular experiences are valued, it is as manifestations of a more sustained experience, particular expressions of an underlying relationship (cf. Acts 6:3-5; 11:24—“full of the Spirit”; Eph 5:18). What we are in touch with here is the vigor of the experiential dimension of earliest Christianity. If the Spirit is the breath of the new life in Christ (cf. Ez 37:9-10, 14; Jn 20:22; 1 Cor 15:45), then presumably the analogy extends further, and the experience of the Spirit is like the experience of breathing: one is not conscious of it all the time, but if one is not conscious of it, at least sometimes, something is wrong.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fellowship of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It was out of this shared experience of the Spirit that the earliest Christian community grew and developed, for this is what “the fellowship [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span>] of the Spirit” properly means: common participation in the same Spirit (Phil 2:1; cf. Acts 2:42; 1 Cor 1:4-9). It was the gift of the Spirit that brought those in Samaria, Caesarea, and elsewhere effectively into the community of the Spirit (Act 8, 10). So also, it was the experience of the one Spirit that provided the unifying bond in the churches of Paul’s mission (1 Cor 12:13; Eph 4:3-4; Phil 2:1-2). Here we see the real importance of the divine manifestations of the Spirit for Paul: it is out of the diversity of these particular manifestations that the body of Christ grows in unity (Rom 12:4-8; 1 Cor 12:12-17; Eph 4:4-16).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SPIRIT OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ruach<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span>) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy.<\/p>\n<p>First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translated “Spirit” in Gn 1:2) that caused the waters of the Flood to subside (8:1). A wind from God blew locusts over Egypt (Ex 10:13) and quail over the camp of Israel. The blast of his nostrils separated the waters of the Red Sea at the exodus (14:21).<\/p>\n<p>Second, it was the breath of God that made man a living being (Gn 2:7). It is one of the earliest perceptions of Hebrew faith that humans live only because of the stirring of the divine breath or spirit within them (Gn 6:3; Jb 33:4; 34:14-15; Ps 104:29-30). Later, a clearer distinction was drawn between divine Spirit and human spirit, and between spirit and soul, but at the earliest stage these were all more or less perceived to be synonymous manifestations of the same divine power, the source of all life—animal as well as human (Gn 7:15, 22; see Eccl 3:19-21).<\/p>\n<p>Third, there were occasions when this divine power seemed to overtake and possess an individual fully, so that his or her words or actions far transcended those of normal behavior. Such a person was clearly marked as an agent of God’s purpose and given respect. This was apparently how leaders were recognized in the premonarchy period—Othniel (Jgs 3:10), Gideon (6:34), Jephthah (11:29), and the first king, Saul (1 Sm 11:6), as well. So, too, the earliest prophets were those whose inspiration came in ecstasy (1 Sm 19:20-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the earlier stages of Hebrew thought, ecstatic experience was seen as the direct effect of divine power. This was true even when the ecstasy was recognized as evil in character, as in the case of Saul’s seizure by the Spirit (1 Sm 16:14-16). A spirit from God could be for evil as well as for good (see Jgs 9:23; 1 Kgs 22:19-23).<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of the Prophets<\/h5>\n<p>For Isaiah, the spirit was that which characterized God and distinguished him and his actions from human affairs (Is 31:3). Later, the adjective “holy” appeared as that which distinguished the Spirit of God from any other spirit, human or divine (Ps 51:11; Is 63:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>The problem of false prophecy emphasized the danger of assuming that every message delivered in ecstasy was the word of the Lord. Thus, tests of prophecy evaluated the content of the message delivered or the character of the prophet’s life, not the degree or quality of inspiration (see Dt 13:1-5; 18:22; Jer 23:14; Mi 3:5). This sense of a need to discriminate between true and false inspiration and to distinguish the word of God from the merely ecstatic oracle may help to explain the otherwise puzzling reluctance of the major eighth- and seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> prophets to attribute their inspiration to the Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Exilic and Postexilic Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In exilic and postexilic literature, the role of the Spirit is narrowed to two major functions: that of the prophetic Spirit and that of the Spirit of the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets again spoke of the Spirit in explicit terms as the inspirer of prophecy (see Ez 3:1-4, 22-24; Hg 2:5; Zec 4:6). As they looked back to the preexilic period, these prophets freely attributed the inspiration of “the former prophets” to the Spirit as well (Zec 7:12).<\/p>\n<p>This tendency to exalt the Spirit’s role as the inspirer of prophecy became steadily stronger in the period between the OT and NT, until in rabbinic Judaism the Spirit was almost exclusively the inspirer of the prophetic writings now regarded as Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The other understanding of the Spirit’s role during exilic and postexilic times was that the Spirit would be the manifestation of the power of God in the age to come. That eschatological hope of divine power effecting a final cleansing and a renewed creation is rooted principally in Isaiah’s prophecies (Is 4:4; 32:15; 44:3-4). Isaiah speaks of one anointed by the Spirit to accomplish complete and final salvation (11:2; 42:1; 61:1). Elsewhere, the same longing is expressed in terms of the Spirit being freely dispensed to all Israel (Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28-29; Zec 12:10) in the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34; Ez 36:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>In the period prior to Jesus, the understanding of the Spirit as the Spirit of prophecy and as the Spirit of the age to come had developed into the widespread dogma that the Spirit was no longer to be experienced in the present. The Spirit had been known in the past as the inspirer of prophetic writings, but after Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, the Spirit had withdrawn (1 Macc 4:44-46; 9:27; 2 Bar 85:1-3; see also Ps 74:9; Zec 13:2-6). The Spirit would be known again in the age of the Messiah, but in the interim the Spirit was absent from Israel. Even the great Hillel (learned Jewish leader and teacher, 60? <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 20?), a near contemporary of Jesus, had not received the Spirit—though if anyone was worthy of the Spirit, it was he. There is a tradition that at a meeting of Hillel and other wise men, a voice from heaven said, “Among those here present is one who would have deserved the Holy Spirit to rest upon him, if his time had been worthy of it.” The wise men all looked at Hillel.<\/p>\n<p>The consequence of this accepted dearth of the Spirit was that the Spirit in effect became subordinated to the law. The Spirit was the inspirer of the law, but since the Spirit could no longer be experienced directly, the law became the sole voice of the Spirit. It was this increasing dominance of the law and its authoritative interpreters that provided the background for the mission of Jesus and the initial spread of Christianity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>If we are to understand the NT’s teaching on the Spirit, we must recognize both its continuity and discontinuity with the OT. At many points NT usage cannot be fully understood except against the background of OT concepts or passages. For example, the ambiguity of John 3:8 (“wind,” “Spirit”), 2 Thessalonians 2:8 (“breath”), and Revelation 11:11 (“breath of life”) takes us back to the basic Hebrew meanings of “spirit.” Acts 8:39 and Revelation 17:3 and 21:10 reflect the same conception of the Spirit that we find in 1 Kings 18:12, 2 Kings 2:16, and Ezekiel 3:14. The NT writers generally share the rabbinic view that Scripture has the authority of the Spirit behind it (see Mk 12:36; Acts 28:25; Heb 3:7; 2 Pt 1:21). The principal continuity is that the NT brings the fulfillment of what the OT writers looked forward to. At the same time, Christianity is not simply fulfilled Judaism. Jesus’ coming and his giving of his Spirit to live within his believers marks off the new faith as something new and distinct.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of the New Age<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of Jesus’ ministry and of the message of the earliest Christians was their conviction and proclamation that the blessings of the new age were already present, that the eschatological Spirit had already been poured out. With the exception of the Essenes at Qumran, no other group or individual within the Jewish religion of that time had dared to make such a bold claim. The prophets and the rabbis looked for a messianic age yet to come, and the apocalyptic writers warned of its imminent arrival, but none thought of it as already present. Even John the Baptist spoke only of one about to come and of the Spirit’s operation in the imminent future (Mk 1:8). But for Jesus and first-century Christians, the longed for hope was a living reality, and the claim carried with it the exciting sense of being in “the last days.” Without some recognition of that eschatological dimension of the Christians’ faith and life, we cannot understand this teaching on, and experience of, the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly thought of his teachings and healings as fulfillment of the prophetic hope (Mt 12:41-42; 13:16-17; Lk 17:20-21). In particular, he saw himself as the one anointed by the Spirit to provide salvation (Mt 5:3-6; 11:5; Lk 4:17-19). So, too, Jesus understood his exorcisms as the effect of the power of God and as manifestations of the end-time rule of God (Mt 12:27-28; Mk 3:22-26). The Gospel writers, especially Luke, emphasize the eschatological character of Jesus’ life and ministry by stressing the role of the Spirit in his birth (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:35, 41, 67; 2:25-27), his baptism (Mk 1:9-10; Acts 10:38), and his ministry (Mt 4:1; 12:18; Mk 1:12; Lk 4:1, 14; 10:21; Jn 3:34).<\/p>\n<p>The Christian church began with the in-breathing of the Holy Spirit on the day of Christ’s resurrection (Jn 20:22), followed by the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost “in the last days.” The overwhelming experience of vision and inspired utterance was taken as proof positive that the new age prophesied by Joel had now arrived (Acts 2:2-5, 17-18). Similarly, in Hebrews the gift of the Spirit is spoken of as “the powers of the age to come” (Heb 6:4-5). More striking still is Paul’s understanding of the Spirit as the guarantee of God’s complete salvation (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14), and as the first installment of the believer’s inheritance of God’s kingdom (Rom 8:15-17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:42-50; Gal 4:6-7; 5:16-18, 21-23; Eph 1:13-14). The Spirit is here again thought of as the power of the age to come, as that power (which will characterize God’s rule at the end of time) already shaping and transforming the lives of believers.<\/p>\n<p>For Paul, this means also that the gift of the Spirit is but the beginning of a lifelong process that will not end until the believer’s whole person is brought under the Spirit’s power (Rom 8:11, 23; 1 Cor 15:44-49; 2 Cor 3:18; 5:1-5). It also means that the present experience of faith is one of lifelong tension between what God has already begun to bring about in the believer’s life and what has not yet been brought under God’s grace (Phil 1:6). It is this tension between life “in the Spirit” and life “in the flesh” (see Gal 2:20) that comes to poignant expression in Romans 7:24 and 2 Corinthians 5:2-4.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of New Life<\/h5>\n<p>Since the Spirit is the mark of the new age, it is not surprising that the NT writers understood the gift of the Spirit to be that which brings an individual into the new age. John the Baptist described the way the coming one would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Mt 3:11). According to Acts 1:5 and 11:16, this imagery was taken up by Jesus, and the promise is seen as fulfilled at Pentecost—the outpouring of the Spirit here being understood as the risen Christ’s action in drawing his disciples into the new age (Acts 2:17, 33).<\/p>\n<p>It seems to be one of Luke’s aims in the book of Acts to highlight the central importance of the gift of the Spirit in conversion-initiation—it is that decisive “gift of the Holy Spirit” that makes one a Christian (Acts 2:38-39). People could have been followers of Jesus on earth, but it was only when they received the gift of the Spirit that they could be said to have “believed in the Lord Jesus Christ” (11:16-17). When the Spirit’s presence was manifested in and upon a person’s life, that was recognized by Peter as proof enough that God had accepted that person, even though he or she had not yet made any formal profession of faith or been baptized (10:44-48; 11:15-18; 15:7-9). So too Apollos, already aglow with the Spirit (18:25), even though his knowledge of “the way of God” was slightly defective (vv 24-26), apparently was not required to supplement his “baptism of John” with Christian baptism. However, the 12 so-called disciples at Ephesus proved by their very ignorance of the Spirit that they were not yet disciples of the Lord Jesus (19:1-6). Paul asked these 12 men, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” (19:2).<\/p>\n<p>This accords with Paul’s emphasis in his letters. Belief and reception of the Spirit go together: to receive the Spirit is to begin the Christian life (Gal 3:2-3); to be baptized in the Spirit is to become a member of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:13); to “have the Spirit of Christ” is to belong to Christ (Rom 8:9-11); to receive the Spirit is tantamount to becoming a child of God (Rom 8:14-17; Gal 4:6-7). The Spirit so characterizes the new age and the life of the new age that only the gift of the Spirit can bring a person into the new age to experience the life of the new age. For the Spirit is distinctively and peculiarly the life-giver; the Spirit indeed <em>is<\/em> the life of the new age (Rom 8:2, 6, 10; 1 Cor 15:45; 2 Cor 3:6; Gal 5:25).<\/p>\n<p>In just the same way in John’s writings, the Spirit is characteristically the life-giving Spirit (Jn 6:63), the power from above, the seed of divine life that brings about the new birth (Jn 3:3-8; 1 Jn 3:9), and a river of living water that brings life when one believes in Christ (Jn 7:37-39; so also 4:10, 14). Or again, reception of the Spirit in John 20:22 is depicted as a new creation analogous to Genesis 2:7. Consequently, in 1 John 3:24 and 4:13, possession and experience of the Spirit count as one of the “tests of life” listed in that letter.<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It will be clear from what has already been said that when the first Christians, like the ancient Hebrews, spoke of the Spirit, they were thinking of experiences of divine power. In the NT, as in the OT, “Spirit” is the word used to explain the experience of new life and vitality (see above), of liberation from legalism (e.g., Rom 8:2; 2 Cor 3:17), of spiritual refreshing and renewal (cf. e.g., Is 32:15; Ez 39:29 with Jn 7:37-39; Rom 5:5; 1 Cor 12:13; 1 Tm 3:5-6). It is important to realize how wide a range of experiences were attributed to the Spirit: ecstatic experiences (Acts 2:24; 10:43-47; 19:6; cf. 10:10; 22:17—“in ecstasy”; 2 Cor 12:1-4; Rv 1:10), emotional experiences (e.g., love—Rom 5:5; joy—Acts 13:52; 1 Thes 1:6; see also Gal 5:22; Phil 2:1-2), experiences of illumination (2 Cor 3:14-17; Eph 1:17-18; Heb 6:4-5; 1 Jn 2:20-21), and experiences issuing in moral transformation (1 Cor 6:9-11). Likewise, when Paul speaks of spiritual gifts, called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">charismata<\/span> (acts or words that bring divine grace to concrete expression), he evidently has a wide range of actual events in mind: inspired speech (1 Cor 12:8-10; 1 Thes 1:5), miracles and healings (1 Cor 12:9; Gal 3:5; cf. Heb 2:4), and various acts of service and help, of counsel and administration, and of aid and mercy (Rom 12:7-8; 1 Cor 12:28).<\/p>\n<p>In talking thus of the Spirit in terms of experience, we should not overemphasize particular experiences or manifestations, as though earliest Christianity consisted of a sequence of mountaintop experiences or spiritual highs. There clearly were such experiences, indeed a wide range of experiences, but no one experience is singled out to be sought by all (except prophecy). There is no distinctively second (or third) experience of the Spirit in the NT, and Paul warned against overvaluing particular manifestations of the Spirit (1 Cor 14:6-19; 2 Cor 12:1-10; cf. Mk 8:11-13). Where particular experiences are valued, it is as manifestations of a more sustained experience, particular expressions of an underlying relationship (cf. Acts 6:3-5; 11:24—“full of the Spirit”; Eph 5:18). What we are in touch with here is the vigor of the experiential dimension of earliest Christianity. If the Spirit is the breath of the new life in Christ (cf. Ez 37:9-10, 14; Jn 20:22; 1 Cor 15:45), then presumably the analogy extends further, and the experience of the Spirit is like the experience of breathing: one is not conscious of it all the time, but if one is not conscious of it, at least sometimes, something is wrong.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fellowship of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It was out of this shared experience of the Spirit that the earliest Christian community grew and developed, for this is what “the fellowship [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span>] of the Spirit” properly means: common participation in the same Spirit (Phil 2:1; cf. Acts 2:42; 1 Cor 1:4-9). It was the gift of the Spirit that brought those in Samaria, Caesarea, and elsewhere effectively into the community of the Spirit (Act 8, 10). So also, it was the experience of the one Spirit that provided the unifying bond in the churches of Paul’s mission (1 Cor 12:13; Eph 4:3-4; Phil 2:1-2). Here we see the real importance of the divine manifestations of the Spirit for Paul: it is out of the diversity of these particular manifestations that the body of Christ grows in unity (Rom 12:4-8; 1 Cor 12:12-17; Eph 4:4-16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"SPIRIT OF GOD Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, ruach; Greek, pneuma) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people. In the Old Testament There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy. First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translat...","summary_en":"SPIRIT OF GOD Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, ruach; Greek, pneuma) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people. In the Old Testament There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy. First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translat...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":36215,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Spirit of Jesus Christ","title_en":"Spirit of Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>SPIRIT OF JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>The Spirit as identified with Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The most important development and element in earliest Christian understanding of the Spirit is that the Spirit is now the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Acts 16:7; Rom 8:9; Gal 4:6; Phil 1:19; 1 Pt 1:11; see also Jn 7:38; 15:26; 16:7; 19:30; Rv 3:1; 5:6). The Spirit is to be identified as the Spirit that bears witness to Jesus (Jn 15:26; 16:13-15; Acts 5:32; 1 Cor 12:3; 1 Jn 4:2; 5:7-8; Rv 19:10), but also, and more profoundly, as the Spirit that inspired and empowered Jesus himself. This Spirit became available to the believers after Christ’s resurrection.<\/p>\n<p> The apostles John and Paul were quite clear in their writings about Christ becoming spirit through resurrection. The keynote verses penned by John are John 6:63; 7:37-39; 14:16-18; 20:22; and 1 John 3:24; 4:13. The critical passages written by Paul are Romans 8:9-10; 1 Corinthians 15:45; 2 Corinthians 3:17-18; and 1 Corinthians 6:17.<\/p>\n<p>Revelation concerning the Spirit of Jesus is progressive in the Gospel of John. John does not tell us from the beginning that people could not actually receive eternal life until the hour of Christ’s glorification. Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life. But no one could really partake of these until after the Lord had risen. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive life via the Lord’s words because his words were themselves spirit and life (Jn 6:63); however, it was not until the Spirit would become available that believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life. After the Lord’s discourse in John 6, Jesus said, “It is the Spirit that gives life, the flesh profits nothing” (v 63). In the flesh Jesus could not give them the bread of life, but when the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “But this he spoke concerning the Spirit, for the Spirit was not yet because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for people to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by people; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat him or drink him until he became spirit, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples became regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “And hereby we know that he abides in us, by the Spirit whom he gave to us” (1 Jn 3:24), and again, “Hereby we know that we abide in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit” (4:13).<\/p>\n<p>The apostles had quite an adjustment to make after Christ’s resurrection. They had become so accustomed to his physical presence that it was difficult for them to learn how to live by his spiritual, indwelling presence. All through the 40 days after his resurrection, from the time the apostles received the inbreathing of the Spirit, Christ was teaching the disciples to make the transfer. He would physically appear and then disappear intermittently. His appearances were very frequent in the beginning and then they steadily diminished. His aim was to guide the apostles into knowing him in his invisible presence. However, this was so new to them that he had to keep appearing to them in order to strengthen and reassure them. But his real desire was to help them live by faith and not by sight. When he appeared to the disciples as they were all together the second time, with Thomas present, he chided Thomas for his unbelief. Then he prounounced this blessing, “Blessed are those who do not see me and yet believe” (Jn 20:29).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul was such a “blessed” one. He did not know Christ in the flesh. He knew only the risen Christ (2 Cor 5:15-16). In this regard, he had an advantage over the early apostles. They had a great adjustment to make, but from the very beginning, Paul knew the risen Christ as Spirit. Paul became the forerunner of all those Christians who have never seen Jesus in the flesh and who have come to experience him in the Spirit. Yes, Paul had seen the risen Lord; he was the last one to do so (1 Cor 15:8). And from that time onward he realized that Jesus was a glorified man, exalted far above all. Paul wrote much concerning this, but his writings did not leave the far-above-all Jesus far away because this was not what Paul experienced. Any experienced Christian should be able to testify that the Christ in the heavens is also the Christ in the heart.<\/p>\n<p>In his writings, Paul often speaks of the Spirit and Christ synonymously. This is evident in Romans 8:9-10. The terms “Spirit of God,” “Spirit of Christ,” and “Christ” are all used interchangeably. The Spirit of God is the Spirit of Christ, and the Spirit of Christ is Christ. In these verses, it is evident that Paul identified the Spirit with Christ because in Christian experience they are absolutely identical. There is no such thing as an experience of Christ apart from the Spirit. The separation and\/or distinction does exist in Trinitarian theology—and for very good reasons—but the separation is nearly nonexistent in actual experience. Several of Paul’s statements are written from the vantage point of experience.<\/p>\n<p>In 1 Corinthians 15:45, Paul says that the risen Jesus became life-giving spirit. Notice the verse does not say Jesus became the Spirit, as if the second person of the Trinity became the third, but that Jesus became spirit in the sense that his mortal existence and form were metamorphosed into a spiritual existence and form. Jesus’ person was not changed through the resurrection, only his form. With this changed spiritual form, Jesus regained the essential state of being he had emptied himself of in becoming a man. Before he became a man, he subsisted in the form of God (Phil 2:6), which form is Spirit and thereby was united to the Spirit (the third of the Trinity), while still remaining distinct. Thus, when the scripture says that the Lord “became life-giving spirit,” it does not mean that the Son became the Holy Spirit. But it does indicate that Christ, via resurrection, appropriated a new, spiritual form (while still retaining a body—a glorified one) that enabled him to commence a new spiritual existence (see 1 Pt 3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In 2 Corinthians 3, Paul explains that the NT ministry is a ministry carried out by the Spirit of the living God (v 3), who is the Spirit that gives life (v 6). In fact, the whole NT economy is characterized as “the ministry of the Spirit” (v 8). At the same time, Paul emphasizes that the function of the NT ministry is to bring God’s people to see and experience the glorious Christ (3:3, 14, 16-18; 4:4-6). It is in this context that Paul boldly declares, “The Lord is the Spirit” (3:17). He who turns his heart to the Lord is, in effect, turning his heart to the Spirit. lf the Lord were not the Spirit abiding in the believers, how could they turn their hearts to him? And how could they be transformed into the same image? Second Corinthians 3:18 says, “But we all, with unveiled face mirroring the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord-Spirit.” According to the Greek, the last phrase of this verse could be rendered “the Lord, the Spirit” (see <span>asv<\/span>) or “the Lord, who is the Spirit” (see <span>rsv<\/span>, <span>niv<\/span>) because the expression “the Spirit” is in direct apposition to “the Lord” (i.e., it is a further description of the Lord). Thus, the Lord is the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>In conclusion, when the Scriptures identify the Spirit with Christ and vice versa, the identification is not equivocation. Christ is not the Holy Spirit. Christ and the Spirit are distinct persons of the Trinity, as is affirmed by the overall teaching of the Word. But the Scriptures do identify Christ and the Spirit in the context of Christian experience. It would be accurate to say that Christians experience Christ through his Spirit, the Spirit of Christ. One cannot know Jesus apart from the Spirit or other than through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Resurrection.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SPIRIT OF JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>The Spirit as identified with Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The most important development and element in earliest Christian understanding of the Spirit is that the Spirit is now the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Acts 16:7; Rom 8:9; Gal 4:6; Phil 1:19; 1 Pt 1:11; see also Jn 7:38; 15:26; 16:7; 19:30; Rv 3:1; 5:6). The Spirit is to be identified as the Spirit that bears witness to Jesus (Jn 15:26; 16:13-15; Acts 5:32; 1 Cor 12:3; 1 Jn 4:2; 5:7-8; Rv 19:10), but also, and more profoundly, as the Spirit that inspired and empowered Jesus himself. This Spirit became available to the believers after Christ’s resurrection.<\/p>\n<p> The apostles John and Paul were quite clear in their writings about Christ becoming spirit through resurrection. The keynote verses penned by John are John 6:63; 7:37-39; 14:16-18; 20:22; and 1 John 3:24; 4:13. The critical passages written by Paul are Romans 8:9-10; 1 Corinthians 15:45; 2 Corinthians 3:17-18; and 1 Corinthians 6:17.<\/p>\n<p>Revelation concerning the Spirit of Jesus is progressive in the Gospel of John. John does not tell us from the beginning that people could not actually receive eternal life until the hour of Christ’s glorification. Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life. But no one could really partake of these until after the Lord had risen. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive life via the Lord’s words because his words were themselves spirit and life (Jn 6:63); however, it was not until the Spirit would become available that believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life. After the Lord’s discourse in John 6, Jesus said, “It is the Spirit that gives life, the flesh profits nothing” (v 63). In the flesh Jesus could not give them the bread of life, but when the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “But this he spoke concerning the Spirit, for the Spirit was not yet because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for people to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by people; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat him or drink him until he became spirit, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples became regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “And hereby we know that he abides in us, by the Spirit whom he gave to us” (1 Jn 3:24), and again, “Hereby we know that we abide in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit” (4:13).<\/p>\n<p>The apostles had quite an adjustment to make after Christ’s resurrection. They had become so accustomed to his physical presence that it was difficult for them to learn how to live by his spiritual, indwelling presence. All through the 40 days after his resurrection, from the time the apostles received the inbreathing of the Spirit, Christ was teaching the disciples to make the transfer. He would physically appear and then disappear intermittently. His appearances were very frequent in the beginning and then they steadily diminished. His aim was to guide the apostles into knowing him in his invisible presence. However, this was so new to them that he had to keep appearing to them in order to strengthen and reassure them. But his real desire was to help them live by faith and not by sight. When he appeared to the disciples as they were all together the second time, with Thomas present, he chided Thomas for his unbelief. Then he prounounced this blessing, “Blessed are those who do not see me and yet believe” (Jn 20:29).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul was such a “blessed” one. He did not know Christ in the flesh. He knew only the risen Christ (2 Cor 5:15-16). In this regard, he had an advantage over the early apostles. They had a great adjustment to make, but from the very beginning, Paul knew the risen Christ as Spirit. Paul became the forerunner of all those Christians who have never seen Jesus in the flesh and who have come to experience him in the Spirit. Yes, Paul had seen the risen Lord; he was the last one to do so (1 Cor 15:8). And from that time onward he realized that Jesus was a glorified man, exalted far above all. Paul wrote much concerning this, but his writings did not leave the far-above-all Jesus far away because this was not what Paul experienced. Any experienced Christian should be able to testify that the Christ in the heavens is also the Christ in the heart.<\/p>\n<p>In his writings, Paul often speaks of the Spirit and Christ synonymously. This is evident in Romans 8:9-10. The terms “Spirit of God,” “Spirit of Christ,” and “Christ” are all used interchangeably. The Spirit of God is the Spirit of Christ, and the Spirit of Christ is Christ. In these verses, it is evident that Paul identified the Spirit with Christ because in Christian experience they are absolutely identical. There is no such thing as an experience of Christ apart from the Spirit. The separation and\/or distinction does exist in Trinitarian theology—and for very good reasons—but the separation is nearly nonexistent in actual experience. Several of Paul’s statements are written from the vantage point of experience.<\/p>\n<p>In 1 Corinthians 15:45, Paul says that the risen Jesus became life-giving spirit. Notice the verse does not say Jesus became the Spirit, as if the second person of the Trinity became the third, but that Jesus became spirit in the sense that his mortal existence and form were metamorphosed into a spiritual existence and form. Jesus’ person was not changed through the resurrection, only his form. With this changed spiritual form, Jesus regained the essential state of being he had emptied himself of in becoming a man. Before he became a man, he subsisted in the form of God (Phil 2:6), which form is Spirit and thereby was united to the Spirit (the third of the Trinity), while still remaining distinct. Thus, when the scripture says that the Lord “became life-giving spirit,” it does not mean that the Son became the Holy Spirit. But it does indicate that Christ, via resurrection, appropriated a new, spiritual form (while still retaining a body—a glorified one) that enabled him to commence a new spiritual existence (see 1 Pt 3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In 2 Corinthians 3, Paul explains that the NT ministry is a ministry carried out by the Spirit of the living God (v 3), who is the Spirit that gives life (v 6). In fact, the whole NT economy is characterized as “the ministry of the Spirit” (v 8). At the same time, Paul emphasizes that the function of the NT ministry is to bring God’s people to see and experience the glorious Christ (3:3, 14, 16-18; 4:4-6). It is in this context that Paul boldly declares, “The Lord is the Spirit” (3:17). He who turns his heart to the Lord is, in effect, turning his heart to the Spirit. lf the Lord were not the Spirit abiding in the believers, how could they turn their hearts to him? And how could they be transformed into the same image? Second Corinthians 3:18 says, “But we all, with unveiled face mirroring the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord-Spirit.” According to the Greek, the last phrase of this verse could be rendered “the Lord, the Spirit” (see <span>asv<\/span>) or “the Lord, who is the Spirit” (see <span>rsv<\/span>, <span>niv<\/span>) because the expression “the Spirit” is in direct apposition to “the Lord” (i.e., it is a further description of the Lord). Thus, the Lord is the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>In conclusion, when the Scriptures identify the Spirit with Christ and vice versa, the identification is not equivocation. Christ is not the Holy Spirit. Christ and the Spirit are distinct persons of the Trinity, as is affirmed by the overall teaching of the Word. But the Scriptures do identify Christ and the Spirit in the context of Christian experience. It would be accurate to say that Christians experience Christ through his Spirit, the Spirit of Christ. One cannot know Jesus apart from the Spirit or other than through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Resurrection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SPIRIT OF JESUS CHRIST The Spirit as identified with Jesus Christ. The most important development and element in earliest Christian understanding of the Spirit is that the Spirit is now the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Acts 16:7; Rom 8:9; Gal 4:6; Phil 1:19; 1 Pt 1:11; see also Jn 7:38; 15:26; 16:7; 19:30; Rv 3:1; 5:6). The Spirit is to be identified as the Spirit that bears witness to Jesus (Jn 15:26; 16:13-15; Acts 5:32; 1 Cor 12:3; 1 Jn 4:2; 5:7-8; Rv 19:10), but also, and more profoundly, as t...","summary_en":"SPIRIT OF JESUS CHRIST The Spirit as identified with Jesus Christ. The most important development and element in earliest Christian understanding of the Spirit is that the Spirit is now the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Acts 16:7; Rom 8:9; Gal 4:6; Phil 1:19; 1 Pt 1:11; see also Jn 7:38; 15:26; 16:7; 19:30; Rv 3:1; 5:6). The Spirit is to be identified as the Spirit that bears witness to Jesus (Jn 15:26; 16:13-15; Acts 5:32; 1 Cor 12:3; 1 Jn 4:2; 5:7-8; Rv 19:10), but also, and more profoundly, as t...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37745,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Truth","title_en":"Truth","content_ro":"<h3>TRUTH<\/h3>\n<p>That which is real and verifiable by experience.<\/p>\n<p>In Scripture, truth is a very important concept because God is the God of all truth (Pss 31:5; 108:4; 146:6), who speaks and judges truly (57:3; 96:13). He is the real source and cause of the whole universe. Scripture also focuses on the revealed truth in the gospel of God’s redeeming grace through Christ. This is the truth Christ and the apostles proclaimed (Jn 8:44-46; 18:37; Rom 9:1; 2 Cor 4:2), which was foreshadowed in the OT (1 Pt 1:10-12), and witnessed to by the Holy Spirit (Jn 16:13). The OT teaching was never false, but it was shadowy and incomplete in comparison with the revealed truth of the NT. So Christ brought spiritual reality (Jn 1:17), and the Holy Spirit leads believers into the experience of all that is real in Christ (16:13).<\/p>\n<p>Christ is the truth because, being God, his words carry divine authority. They are truth and life (Jn 6:63). In addition, the life of Christ epitomized truthfulness and utter reliability. When people live in obedience to the truth, they themselves are true and reliable. Scripture calls upon people to “do the truth” (Jn 3:21, <span>kjv<\/span>). Those who have experienced God’s reality in Christ know, by experience, that Christ is the way, the truth, and the life (Jn 14:6).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TRUTH<\/h3>\n<p>That which is real and verifiable by experience.<\/p>\n<p>In Scripture, truth is a very important concept because God is the God of all truth (Pss 31:5; 108:4; 146:6), who speaks and judges truly (57:3; 96:13). He is the real source and cause of the whole universe. Scripture also focuses on the revealed truth in the gospel of God’s redeeming grace through Christ. This is the truth Christ and the apostles proclaimed (Jn 8:44-46; 18:37; Rom 9:1; 2 Cor 4:2), which was foreshadowed in the OT (1 Pt 1:10-12), and witnessed to by the Holy Spirit (Jn 16:13). The OT teaching was never false, but it was shadowy and incomplete in comparison with the revealed truth of the NT. So Christ brought spiritual reality (Jn 1:17), and the Holy Spirit leads believers into the experience of all that is real in Christ (16:13).<\/p>\n<p>Christ is the truth because, being God, his words carry divine authority. They are truth and life (Jn 6:63). In addition, the life of Christ epitomized truthfulness and utter reliability. When people live in obedience to the truth, they themselves are true and reliable. Scripture calls upon people to “do the truth” (Jn 3:21, <span>kjv<\/span>). Those who have experienced God’s reality in Christ know, by experience, that Christ is the way, the truth, and the life (Jn 14:6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"TRUTH That which is real and verifiable by experience. In Scripture, truth is a very important concept because God is the God of all truth (Pss 31:5; 108:4; 146:6), who speaks and judges truly (57:3; 96:13). He is the real source and cause of the whole universe. Scripture also focuses on the revealed truth in the gospel of God’s redeeming grace through Christ. This is the truth Christ and the apostles proclaimed (Jn 8:44-46; 18:37; Rom 9:1; 2 Cor 4:2), which was foreshadowed in the OT (1 Pt 1...","summary_en":"TRUTH That which is real and verifiable by experience. In Scripture, truth is a very important concept because God is the God of all truth (Pss 31:5; 108:4; 146:6), who speaks and judges truly (57:3; 96:13). He is the real source and cause of the whole universe. Scripture also focuses on the revealed truth in the gospel of God’s redeeming grace through Christ. This is the truth Christ and the apostles proclaimed (Jn 8:44-46; 18:37; Rom 9:1; 2 Cor 4:2), which was foreshadowed in the OT (1 Pt 1...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56453,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:63","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:63","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:63<\/strong> The essence of Jesus’ gift is found in the Holy <em>Spirit alone<\/em><em>,<\/em> not in <em>human effort<\/em> (literally <em>the flesh<\/em>). Life and understanding come through the gift of the Spirit (see 14:15-20; 20:21-22). True life can be found only when the Holy Spirit infuses human life.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:63<\/strong> The essence of Jesus’ gift is found in the Holy <em>Spirit alone<\/em><em>,<\/em> not in <em>human effort<\/em> (literally <em>the flesh<\/em>). Life and understanding come through the gift of the Spirit (see 14:15-20; 20:21-22). True life can be found only when the Holy Spirit infuses human life.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:63 The essence of Jesus’ gift is found in the Holy Spirit alone, not in human effort (literally the flesh). Life and understanding come through the gift of the Spirit (see 14:15-20; 20:21-22). True life can be found only when the Holy Spirit infuses human life.","summary_en":"6:63 The essence of Jesus’ gift is found in the Holy Spirit alone, not in human effort (literally the flesh). Life and understanding come through the gift of the Spirit (see 14:15-20; 20:21-22). True life can be found only when the Holy Spirit infuses human life.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84079,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:63","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:63","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:63<\/strong> The essence of Jesus’ gift is found in the Holy <em>Spirit alone<\/em><em>,<\/em> not in <em>human effort<\/em> (literally <em>the flesh<\/em>). Life and understanding come through the gift of the Spirit (see 14:15-20; 20:21-22). True life can be found only when the Holy Spirit infuses human life.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:63<\/strong> The essence of Jesus’ gift is found in the Holy <em>Spirit alone<\/em><em>,<\/em> not in <em>human effort<\/em> (literally <em>the flesh<\/em>). Life and understanding come through the gift of the Spirit (see 14:15-20; 20:21-22). True life can be found only when the Holy Spirit infuses human life.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:63 The essence of Jesus’ gift is found in the Holy Spirit alone, not in human effort (literally the flesh). Life and understanding come through the gift of the Spirit (see 14:15-20; 20:21-22). True life can be found only when the Holy Spirit infuses human life.","summary_en":"6:63 The essence of Jesus’ gift is found in the Holy Spirit alone, not in human effort (literally the flesh). Life and understanding come through the gift of the Spirit (see 14:15-20; 20:21-22). True life can be found only when the Holy Spirit infuses human life.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111705,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:63","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:63","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:63<\/strong> The essence of Jesus’ gift is found in the Holy <em>Spirit alone<\/em><em>,<\/em> not in <em>human effort<\/em> (literally <em>the flesh<\/em>). Life and understanding come through the gift of the Spirit (see 14:15-20; 20:21-22). True life can be found only when the Holy Spirit infuses human life.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:63<\/strong> The essence of Jesus’ gift is found in the Holy <em>Spirit alone<\/em><em>,<\/em> not in <em>human effort<\/em> (literally <em>the flesh<\/em>). Life and understanding come through the gift of the Spirit (see 14:15-20; 20:21-22). True life can be found only when the Holy Spirit infuses human life.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:63 The essence of Jesus’ gift is found in the Holy Spirit alone, not in human effort (literally the flesh). Life and understanding come through the gift of the Spirit (see 14:15-20; 20:21-22). True life can be found only when the Holy Spirit infuses human life.","summary_en":"6:63 The essence of Jesus’ gift is found in the Holy Spirit alone, not in human effort (literally the flesh). Life and understanding come through the gift of the Spirit (see 14:15-20; 20:21-22). True life can be found only when the Holy Spirit infuses human life.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139331,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:63","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:63","content_ro":"<p><strong>6:63<\/strong> The essence of Jesus’ gift is found in the Holy <em>Spirit alone<\/em><em>,<\/em> not in <em>human effort<\/em> (literally <em>the flesh<\/em>). Life and understanding come through the gift of the Spirit (see 14:15-20; 20:21-22). True life can be found only when the Holy Spirit infuses human life.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>6:63<\/strong> The essence of Jesus’ gift is found in the Holy <em>Spirit alone<\/em><em>,<\/em> not in <em>human effort<\/em> (literally <em>the flesh<\/em>). Life and understanding come through the gift of the Spirit (see 14:15-20; 20:21-22). True life can be found only when the Holy Spirit infuses human life.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:63 The essence of Jesus’ gift is found in the Holy Spirit alone, not in human effort (literally the flesh). Life and understanding come through the gift of the Spirit (see 14:15-20; 20:21-22). True life can be found only when the Holy Spirit infuses human life.","summary_en":"6:63 The essence of Jesus’ gift is found in the Holy Spirit alone, not in human effort (literally the flesh). Life and understanding come through the gift of the Spirit (see 14:15-20; 20:21-22). True life can be found only when the Holy Spirit infuses human life.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60607,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88233,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115859,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143485,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Bread from Heaven","title_en":"Bread from Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Bread from Heaven<\/h3>\n<p>As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spiritual relationship with the Lord and as a sign of God’s miraculous provision for his people (see 1 Cor 10:3-4). At the same time, manna was associated with Israel’s complaining against God and with their lack of trust in his provision (Num 11:1-15; see 1 Cor 10:5).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jesus had miraculously fed the 5,000 near the Sea of Galilee, he taught in the synagogue at Capernaum about the “bread of life” (John 6:22-59). He identified himself as the “true bread of God” and “the bread of life” (John 6:32-35); he even linked eternal life with the need to “eat [his] flesh” and “drink his blood” (John 6:50-58). Just as the manna provided food in the wilderness, Jesus—the true bread from God—offers spiritual sustenance. Israel was humbled by their need for food in the wilderness (Deut 8:3). Now followers of Jesus must humble themselves and receive the fullness of his life by faith (John 6:35-40, 47-51, 63-64).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 16:1-36; Num 11:1-15; Deut 8:3, 16; Josh 5:10-12; Neh 9:20-21; Pss 78:24; 105:40; John 6:1-15, 22-64; 1 Cor 10:3-5; Rev 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","summary_en":"Bread from Heaven As the Israelites left Egypt behind and entered the wilderness, God sent manna, a breadlike substance, to sustain them (Exod 16). The Lord gave them food adequate for their daily needs (see Neh 9:20-21). This “bread from heaven” showed God’s people his love and illustrated his special provision for Israel in the wilderness (see Deut 8:3, 16; Pss 78:24; 105:40; cp. Rev 2:17). Although manna was actual food, some passages use the term in a spiritual sense to symbolize a spirit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"65":[{"id":56454,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:65","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:65","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:65<\/strong> <em>people can’t come to me unless the Father gives them to me<\/em> (see 6:44): Only God’s light can penetrate the profound darkness of the world.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:65<\/strong> <em>people can’t come to me unless the Father gives them to me<\/em> (see 6:44): Only God’s light can penetrate the profound darkness of the world.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:65 people can’t come to me unless the Father gives them to me (see 6:44): Only God’s light can penetrate the profound darkness of the world.","summary_en":"6:65 people can’t come to me unless the Father gives them to me (see 6:44): Only God’s light can penetrate the profound darkness of the world.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84080,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:65","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:65","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:65<\/strong> <em>people can’t come to me unless the Father gives them to me<\/em> (see 6:44): Only God’s light can penetrate the profound darkness of the world.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:65<\/strong> <em>people can’t come to me unless the Father gives them to me<\/em> (see 6:44): Only God’s light can penetrate the profound darkness of the world.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:65 people can’t come to me unless the Father gives them to me (see 6:44): Only God’s light can penetrate the profound darkness of the world.","summary_en":"6:65 people can’t come to me unless the Father gives them to me (see 6:44): Only God’s light can penetrate the profound darkness of the world.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111706,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:65","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:65","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:65<\/strong> <em>people can’t come to me unless the Father gives them to me<\/em> (see 6:44): Only God’s light can penetrate the profound darkness of the world.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:65<\/strong> <em>people can’t come to me unless the Father gives them to me<\/em> (see 6:44): Only God’s light can penetrate the profound darkness of the world.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:65 people can’t come to me unless the Father gives them to me (see 6:44): Only God’s light can penetrate the profound darkness of the world.","summary_en":"6:65 people can’t come to me unless the Father gives them to me (see 6:44): Only God’s light can penetrate the profound darkness of the world.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139332,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:65","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:65","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:65<\/strong> <em>people can’t come to me unless the Father gives them to me<\/em> (see 6:44): Only God’s light can penetrate the profound darkness of the world.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:65<\/strong> <em>people can’t come to me unless the Father gives them to me<\/em> (see 6:44): Only God’s light can penetrate the profound darkness of the world.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:65 people can’t come to me unless the Father gives them to me (see 6:44): Only God’s light can penetrate the profound darkness of the world.","summary_en":"6:65 people can’t come to me unless the Father gives them to me (see 6:44): Only God’s light can penetrate the profound darkness of the world.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"66":[{"id":2370,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Apostasy","title_en":"Apostasy","content_ro":"<h3>APOSTASY<\/h3>\n<p>Turning against God, as evidenced by abandonment and repudiation of former beliefs. The term generally refers to a deliberate renouncing of the faith by a once sincere believer rather than a state of ignorance or mistaken knowledge. Apostasy is distinguished from heresy (denial of a part of the faith) and from transfer of allegiance from one religious body to another within the same faith. Also, it is possible to deny the faith, as Peter once did, and then at a later time reaffirm it.<\/p>\n<p>Originally, “apostasy” meant literal rebellion. Thus the Jews were described as “rebels” against King Artaxerxes (1 Esd 2:23) and Jason as a “rebel against the laws” (2 Macc 5:6-8). OT descriptions of spiritual rebellion include departure from the law, forsaking temple worship, and willful disobedience toward God himself (Jos 22:22; 2 Chr 29:19; Jer 2:19). The prophetic writings of Isaiah and Jeremiah provide many examples of Israel’s defections (Is 1:2-4; Jer 2:19). Israelite kings were often guilty of apostasy: Rehoboam (1 Kgs 14:22-24); Ahab (1 Kgs 16:30-33); Ahaziah (1 Kgs 22:51-53); Jehoram (2 Chr 21:6, 10); Ahaz (2 Chr 28:1-4); Manasseh (2 Chr 33:1-19); Amon (2 Chr 33:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times many disciples withdrew from Christ (Jn 6:66)—the most notorious example being Judas Iscariot. The Greek word from which “apostasy” is derived appears in only two passages. The apostle Paul was accused of apostasy for teaching others “to turn their backs on the laws of Moses” (Acts 21:21, <span>nlt<\/span>). And apostasy is given an eschatological (end times) significance in 2 Thessalonians 2:3. Christians were warned not to be carried away and deceived in the widespread apostasy to come in the end times before the Lord’s return. That apostasy is linked to the rise of a man of rebellion who will be Satan’s tool (2 Thes 2:3-12; cf. 1 Tm 4:1-3).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>APOSTASY<\/h3>\n<p>Turning against God, as evidenced by abandonment and repudiation of former beliefs. The term generally refers to a deliberate renouncing of the faith by a once sincere believer rather than a state of ignorance or mistaken knowledge. Apostasy is distinguished from heresy (denial of a part of the faith) and from transfer of allegiance from one religious body to another within the same faith. Also, it is possible to deny the faith, as Peter once did, and then at a later time reaffirm it.<\/p>\n<p>Originally, “apostasy” meant literal rebellion. Thus the Jews were described as “rebels” against King Artaxerxes (1 Esd 2:23) and Jason as a “rebel against the laws” (2 Macc 5:6-8). OT descriptions of spiritual rebellion include departure from the law, forsaking temple worship, and willful disobedience toward God himself (Jos 22:22; 2 Chr 29:19; Jer 2:19). The prophetic writings of Isaiah and Jeremiah provide many examples of Israel’s defections (Is 1:2-4; Jer 2:19). Israelite kings were often guilty of apostasy: Rehoboam (1 Kgs 14:22-24); Ahab (1 Kgs 16:30-33); Ahaziah (1 Kgs 22:51-53); Jehoram (2 Chr 21:6, 10); Ahaz (2 Chr 28:1-4); Manasseh (2 Chr 33:1-19); Amon (2 Chr 33:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times many disciples withdrew from Christ (Jn 6:66)—the most notorious example being Judas Iscariot. The Greek word from which “apostasy” is derived appears in only two passages. The apostle Paul was accused of apostasy for teaching others “to turn their backs on the laws of Moses” (Acts 21:21, <span>nlt<\/span>). And apostasy is given an eschatological (end times) significance in 2 Thessalonians 2:3. Christians were warned not to be carried away and deceived in the widespread apostasy to come in the end times before the Lord’s return. That apostasy is linked to the rise of a man of rebellion who will be Satan’s tool (2 Thes 2:3-12; cf. 1 Tm 4:1-3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"APOSTASY Turning against God, as evidenced by abandonment and repudiation of former beliefs. The term generally refers to a deliberate renouncing of the faith by a once sincere believer rather than a state of ignorance or mistaken knowledge. Apostasy is distinguished from heresy (denial of a part of the faith) and from transfer of allegiance from one religious body to another within the same faith. Also, it is possible to deny the faith, as Peter once did, and then at a later time reaffirm it...","summary_en":"APOSTASY Turning against God, as evidenced by abandonment and repudiation of former beliefs. The term generally refers to a deliberate renouncing of the faith by a once sincere believer rather than a state of ignorance or mistaken knowledge. Apostasy is distinguished from heresy (denial of a part of the faith) and from transfer of allegiance from one religious body to another within the same faith. Also, it is possible to deny the faith, as Peter once did, and then at a later time reaffirm it...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":6320,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Christ","title_en":"Christ","content_ro":"<h3>CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Christos<\/span><em>,<\/em> which translates Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Messiah<\/span> (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the title is used in combination with the given name, as “Jesus Christ” (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Rom 1:4), “Christ Jesus” (<span>niv<\/span> Rom 1:1; 1 Cor 1:1), with the article “the” (Rom 7:4), or with another title “Lord” (Rom 16:18). It is also used alone as the one favored substitute name or title for Jesus (Jn 20:31; Rom 15:3; Heb 3:6; 5:5; 1 Pt 1:11, 19).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels portray Jesus as modestly accepting the title and role of the Messiah. His baptism should be understood as his anointing to the threefold office of prophet, priest, and king. At his baptism by John (the new Elijah, Mt 11:14), Jesus received the outpouring of the Spirit and God’s mandate to begin his ministry (Mt 3:16–4:17). John himself denied being the anointed one but tacitly identified Jesus as the Christ (Jn 1:20; Lk 3:14-17). Jesus’ first disciples followed him because they knew he was the Messiah (Jn 1:41). The demons recognized him as “the Holy One [anointed] of God” (Mk 1:24; cf. Mt 8:29). The crowds followed him as the Prophet, the new Moses (Jn 6:14, 32), but deserted him when they understood that his kingdom was a spiritual, not a political realm (v 66). The Twelve remained loyal, saying, “We believe . . . you are the Holy One of God” (Jn 6:69, <span>niv<\/span>). The confession of the disciples voiced by Peter and approved by Jesus as a divine revelation is “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16, <span>niv<\/span>). At his trials the decisive factor in Jesus’ condemnation was his claim to be the Christ (Mt 26:63-64, 68; 27:11, 17, 22, 37).<\/p>\n<p>An important feature in the earliest Christian preaching was the proclamation that Jesus is the Christ (Acts 2:36; 3:18-20; 9:22; 28:23, 31). This remains the earliest (Mt 16:16) and most basic article of Christian confession (1 Cor 1:23; 1 Jn 5:1), affirming that Jesus perfectly fulfilled the role of anointed prophet, priest, and king as the servant of God for his people (Lk 7:16; 1 Cor 15:25; Heb 7:22-28; Rv 19:16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Messiah.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Christos<\/span><em>,<\/em> which translates Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Messiah<\/span> (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the title is used in combination with the given name, as “Jesus Christ” (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Rom 1:4), “Christ Jesus” (<span>niv<\/span> Rom 1:1; 1 Cor 1:1), with the article “the” (Rom 7:4), or with another title “Lord” (Rom 16:18). It is also used alone as the one favored substitute name or title for Jesus (Jn 20:31; Rom 15:3; Heb 3:6; 5:5; 1 Pt 1:11, 19).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels portray Jesus as modestly accepting the title and role of the Messiah. His baptism should be understood as his anointing to the threefold office of prophet, priest, and king. At his baptism by John (the new Elijah, Mt 11:14), Jesus received the outpouring of the Spirit and God’s mandate to begin his ministry (Mt 3:16–4:17). John himself denied being the anointed one but tacitly identified Jesus as the Christ (Jn 1:20; Lk 3:14-17). Jesus’ first disciples followed him because they knew he was the Messiah (Jn 1:41). The demons recognized him as “the Holy One [anointed] of God” (Mk 1:24; cf. Mt 8:29). The crowds followed him as the Prophet, the new Moses (Jn 6:14, 32), but deserted him when they understood that his kingdom was a spiritual, not a political realm (v 66). The Twelve remained loyal, saying, “We believe . . . you are the Holy One of God” (Jn 6:69, <span>niv<\/span>). The confession of the disciples voiced by Peter and approved by Jesus as a divine revelation is “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16, <span>niv<\/span>). At his trials the decisive factor in Jesus’ condemnation was his claim to be the Christ (Mt 26:63-64, 68; 27:11, 17, 22, 37).<\/p>\n<p>An important feature in the earliest Christian preaching was the proclamation that Jesus is the Christ (Acts 2:36; 3:18-20; 9:22; 28:23, 31). This remains the earliest (Mt 16:16) and most basic article of Christian confession (1 Cor 1:23; 1 Jn 5:1), affirming that Jesus perfectly fulfilled the role of anointed prophet, priest, and king as the servant of God for his people (Lk 7:16; 1 Cor 15:25; Heb 7:22-28; Rv 19:16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Messiah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CHRIST Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek Christos, which translates Hebrew Messiah (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function. In the NT the title is used i...","summary_en":"CHRIST Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek Christos, which translates Hebrew Messiah (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function. In the NT the title is used i...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":63911,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Holy One of Israel","title_en":"The Holy One of Israel","content_ro":"<h3>The Holy One of Israel<\/h3>\n<p>The phrase <em>The Holy One of Israel<\/em> is particularly prominent in the book of Isaiah, occurring around two dozen times. The Holy One is the King (6:5), the righteous and just one (26:7), the incomparable God (40:25), and the Redeemer of his people (41:14). Anyone coming to the Holy One must worship him in reverence and awe. The Holy One identifies himself with Mount Zion, called holy because it is his symbolic dwelling place (see 18:7; 24:23; 27:13; 56:7; 60:1-22).<\/p>\n<p>The Holy One stands apart from all his creation because he is morally perfect. Sinful people cannot dwell with him (see 1:4). God’s holiness requires ritual purity and moral perfection. God is a consuming fire who purges away anything that does not conform to his holy will (see 33:14).<\/p>\n<p>Yet the Holy One sets aside a remnant for himself (4:2-3; 6:13). He washes away their filth and commits to be present with them (12:6), his own redeemed people (35:8-9; 62:12; see also 49:7). He demonstrates his holy power as he comes to the aid of sinful and weak humans, rescues them from the exile that their sin creates, and opens up the new creation for them.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 71:22-23; 78:41; Prov 9:10; Isa 6:1-5; 10:17, 20; 17:7; 29:17-24; 30:15; 41:14, 17-20; 43:1-4, 10-21; 48:17-18; 54:4-5; 55:5; 57:15; Jer 50:29; 51:5; Ezek 39:7-8; Hos 11:8-9; Hab 3:3-6; John 6:66-69; Acts 2:27; 13:35; Rev 16:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Holy One of Israel<\/h3>\n<p>The phrase <em>The Holy One of Israel<\/em> is particularly prominent in the book of Isaiah, occurring around two dozen times. The Holy One is the King (6:5), the righteous and just one (26:7), the incomparable God (40:25), and the Redeemer of his people (41:14). Anyone coming to the Holy One must worship him in reverence and awe. The Holy One identifies himself with Mount Zion, called holy because it is his symbolic dwelling place (see 18:7; 24:23; 27:13; 56:7; 60:1-22).<\/p>\n<p>The Holy One stands apart from all his creation because he is morally perfect. Sinful people cannot dwell with him (see 1:4). God’s holiness requires ritual purity and moral perfection. God is a consuming fire who purges away anything that does not conform to his holy will (see 33:14).<\/p>\n<p>Yet the Holy One sets aside a remnant for himself (4:2-3; 6:13). He washes away their filth and commits to be present with them (12:6), his own redeemed people (35:8-9; 62:12; see also 49:7). He demonstrates his holy power as he comes to the aid of sinful and weak humans, rescues them from the exile that their sin creates, and opens up the new creation for them.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 71:22-23; 78:41; Prov 9:10; Isa 6:1-5; 10:17, 20; 17:7; 29:17-24; 30:15; 41:14, 17-20; 43:1-4, 10-21; 48:17-18; 54:4-5; 55:5; 57:15; Jer 50:29; 51:5; Ezek 39:7-8; Hos 11:8-9; Hab 3:3-6; John 6:66-69; Acts 2:27; 13:35; Rev 16:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Holy One of Israel The phrase The Holy One of Israel is particularly prominent in the book of Isaiah, occurring around two dozen times. The Holy One is the King (6:5), the righteous and just one (26:7), the incomparable God (40:25), and the Redeemer of his people (41:14). Anyone coming to the Holy One must worship him in reverence and awe. The Holy One identifies himself with Mount Zion, called holy because it is his symbolic dwelling place (see 18:7; 24:23; 27:13; 56:7; 60:1-22). The Hol...","summary_en":"The Holy One of Israel The phrase The Holy One of Israel is particularly prominent in the book of Isaiah, occurring around two dozen times. The Holy One is the King (6:5), the righteous and just one (26:7), the incomparable God (40:25), and the Redeemer of his people (41:14). Anyone coming to the Holy One must worship him in reverence and awe. The Holy One identifies himself with Mount Zion, called holy because it is his symbolic dwelling place (see 18:7; 24:23; 27:13; 56:7; 60:1-22). The Hol...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91537,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Holy One of Israel","title_en":"The Holy One of Israel","content_ro":"<h3>The Holy One of Israel<\/h3>\n<p>The phrase <em>The Holy One of Israel<\/em> is particularly prominent in the book of Isaiah, occurring around two dozen times. The Holy One is the King (6:5), the righteous and just one (26:7), the incomparable God (40:25), and the Redeemer of his people (41:14). Anyone coming to the Holy One must worship him in reverence and awe. The Holy One identifies himself with Mount Zion, called holy because it is his symbolic dwelling place (see 18:7; 24:23; 27:13; 56:7; 60:1-22).<\/p>\n<p>The Holy One stands apart from all his creation because he is morally perfect. Sinful people cannot dwell with him (see 1:4). God’s holiness requires ritual purity and moral perfection. God is a consuming fire who purges away anything that does not conform to his holy will (see 33:14).<\/p>\n<p>Yet the Holy One sets aside a remnant for himself (4:2-3; 6:13). He washes away their filth and commits to be present with them (12:6), his own redeemed people (35:8-9; 62:12; see also 49:7). He demonstrates his holy power as he comes to the aid of sinful and weak humans, rescues them from the exile that their sin creates, and opens up the new creation for them.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 71:22-23; 78:41; Prov 9:10; Isa 6:1-5; 10:17, 20; 17:7; 29:17-24; 30:15; 41:14, 17-20; 43:1-4, 10-21; 48:17-18; 54:4-5; 55:5; 57:15; Jer 50:29; 51:5; Ezek 39:7-8; Hos 11:8-9; Hab 3:3-6; John 6:66-69; Acts 2:27; 13:35; Rev 16:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Holy One of Israel<\/h3>\n<p>The phrase <em>The Holy One of Israel<\/em> is particularly prominent in the book of Isaiah, occurring around two dozen times. The Holy One is the King (6:5), the righteous and just one (26:7), the incomparable God (40:25), and the Redeemer of his people (41:14). Anyone coming to the Holy One must worship him in reverence and awe. The Holy One identifies himself with Mount Zion, called holy because it is his symbolic dwelling place (see 18:7; 24:23; 27:13; 56:7; 60:1-22).<\/p>\n<p>The Holy One stands apart from all his creation because he is morally perfect. Sinful people cannot dwell with him (see 1:4). God’s holiness requires ritual purity and moral perfection. God is a consuming fire who purges away anything that does not conform to his holy will (see 33:14).<\/p>\n<p>Yet the Holy One sets aside a remnant for himself (4:2-3; 6:13). He washes away their filth and commits to be present with them (12:6), his own redeemed people (35:8-9; 62:12; see also 49:7). He demonstrates his holy power as he comes to the aid of sinful and weak humans, rescues them from the exile that their sin creates, and opens up the new creation for them.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 71:22-23; 78:41; Prov 9:10; Isa 6:1-5; 10:17, 20; 17:7; 29:17-24; 30:15; 41:14, 17-20; 43:1-4, 10-21; 48:17-18; 54:4-5; 55:5; 57:15; Jer 50:29; 51:5; Ezek 39:7-8; Hos 11:8-9; Hab 3:3-6; John 6:66-69; Acts 2:27; 13:35; Rev 16:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Holy One of Israel The phrase The Holy One of Israel is particularly prominent in the book of Isaiah, occurring around two dozen times. The Holy One is the King (6:5), the righteous and just one (26:7), the incomparable God (40:25), and the Redeemer of his people (41:14). Anyone coming to the Holy One must worship him in reverence and awe. The Holy One identifies himself with Mount Zion, called holy because it is his symbolic dwelling place (see 18:7; 24:23; 27:13; 56:7; 60:1-22). The Hol...","summary_en":"The Holy One of Israel The phrase The Holy One of Israel is particularly prominent in the book of Isaiah, occurring around two dozen times. The Holy One is the King (6:5), the righteous and just one (26:7), the incomparable God (40:25), and the Redeemer of his people (41:14). Anyone coming to the Holy One must worship him in reverence and awe. The Holy One identifies himself with Mount Zion, called holy because it is his symbolic dwelling place (see 18:7; 24:23; 27:13; 56:7; 60:1-22). The Hol...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119163,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Holy One of Israel","title_en":"The Holy One of Israel","content_ro":"<h3>The Holy One of Israel<\/h3>\n<p>The phrase <em>The Holy One of Israel<\/em> is particularly prominent in the book of Isaiah, occurring around two dozen times. The Holy One is the King (6:5), the righteous and just one (26:7), the incomparable God (40:25), and the Redeemer of his people (41:14). Anyone coming to the Holy One must worship him in reverence and awe. The Holy One identifies himself with Mount Zion, called holy because it is his symbolic dwelling place (see 18:7; 24:23; 27:13; 56:7; 60:1-22).<\/p>\n<p>The Holy One stands apart from all his creation because he is morally perfect. Sinful people cannot dwell with him (see 1:4). God’s holiness requires ritual purity and moral perfection. God is a consuming fire who purges away anything that does not conform to his holy will (see 33:14).<\/p>\n<p>Yet the Holy One sets aside a remnant for himself (4:2-3; 6:13). He washes away their filth and commits to be present with them (12:6), his own redeemed people (35:8-9; 62:12; see also 49:7). He demonstrates his holy power as he comes to the aid of sinful and weak humans, rescues them from the exile that their sin creates, and opens up the new creation for them.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 71:22-23; 78:41; Prov 9:10; Isa 6:1-5; 10:17, 20; 17:7; 29:17-24; 30:15; 41:14, 17-20; 43:1-4, 10-21; 48:17-18; 54:4-5; 55:5; 57:15; Jer 50:29; 51:5; Ezek 39:7-8; Hos 11:8-9; Hab 3:3-6; John 6:66-69; Acts 2:27; 13:35; Rev 16:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Holy One of Israel<\/h3>\n<p>The phrase <em>The Holy One of Israel<\/em> is particularly prominent in the book of Isaiah, occurring around two dozen times. The Holy One is the King (6:5), the righteous and just one (26:7), the incomparable God (40:25), and the Redeemer of his people (41:14). Anyone coming to the Holy One must worship him in reverence and awe. The Holy One identifies himself with Mount Zion, called holy because it is his symbolic dwelling place (see 18:7; 24:23; 27:13; 56:7; 60:1-22).<\/p>\n<p>The Holy One stands apart from all his creation because he is morally perfect. Sinful people cannot dwell with him (see 1:4). God’s holiness requires ritual purity and moral perfection. God is a consuming fire who purges away anything that does not conform to his holy will (see 33:14).<\/p>\n<p>Yet the Holy One sets aside a remnant for himself (4:2-3; 6:13). He washes away their filth and commits to be present with them (12:6), his own redeemed people (35:8-9; 62:12; see also 49:7). He demonstrates his holy power as he comes to the aid of sinful and weak humans, rescues them from the exile that their sin creates, and opens up the new creation for them.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 71:22-23; 78:41; Prov 9:10; Isa 6:1-5; 10:17, 20; 17:7; 29:17-24; 30:15; 41:14, 17-20; 43:1-4, 10-21; 48:17-18; 54:4-5; 55:5; 57:15; Jer 50:29; 51:5; Ezek 39:7-8; Hos 11:8-9; Hab 3:3-6; John 6:66-69; Acts 2:27; 13:35; Rev 16:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Holy One of Israel The phrase The Holy One of Israel is particularly prominent in the book of Isaiah, occurring around two dozen times. The Holy One is the King (6:5), the righteous and just one (26:7), the incomparable God (40:25), and the Redeemer of his people (41:14). Anyone coming to the Holy One must worship him in reverence and awe. The Holy One identifies himself with Mount Zion, called holy because it is his symbolic dwelling place (see 18:7; 24:23; 27:13; 56:7; 60:1-22). The Hol...","summary_en":"The Holy One of Israel The phrase The Holy One of Israel is particularly prominent in the book of Isaiah, occurring around two dozen times. The Holy One is the King (6:5), the righteous and just one (26:7), the incomparable God (40:25), and the Redeemer of his people (41:14). Anyone coming to the Holy One must worship him in reverence and awe. The Holy One identifies himself with Mount Zion, called holy because it is his symbolic dwelling place (see 18:7; 24:23; 27:13; 56:7; 60:1-22). The Hol...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":146789,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Holy One of Israel","title_en":"The Holy One of Israel","content_ro":"<h3>The Holy One of Israel<\/h3>\n<p>The phrase <em>The Holy One of Israel<\/em> is particularly prominent in the book of Isaiah, occurring around two dozen times. The Holy One is the King (6:5), the righteous and just one (26:7), the incomparable God (40:25), and the Redeemer of his people (41:14). Anyone coming to the Holy One must worship him in reverence and awe. The Holy One identifies himself with Mount Zion, called holy because it is his symbolic dwelling place (see 18:7; 24:23; 27:13; 56:7; 60:1-22).<\/p>\n<p>The Holy One stands apart from all his creation because he is morally perfect. Sinful people cannot dwell with him (see 1:4). God’s holiness requires ritual purity and moral perfection. God is a consuming fire who purges away anything that does not conform to his holy will (see 33:14).<\/p>\n<p>Yet the Holy One sets aside a remnant for himself (4:2-3; 6:13). He washes away their filth and commits to be present with them (12:6), his own redeemed people (35:8-9; 62:12; see also 49:7). He demonstrates his holy power as he comes to the aid of sinful and weak humans, rescues them from the exile that their sin creates, and opens up the new creation for them.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 71:22-23; 78:41; Prov 9:10; Isa 6:1-5; 10:17, 20; 17:7; 29:17-24; 30:15; 41:14, 17-20; 43:1-4, 10-21; 48:17-18; 54:4-5; 55:5; 57:15; Jer 50:29; 51:5; Ezek 39:7-8; Hos 11:8-9; Hab 3:3-6; John 6:66-69; Acts 2:27; 13:35; Rev 16:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Holy One of Israel<\/h3>\n<p>The phrase <em>The Holy One of Israel<\/em> is particularly prominent in the book of Isaiah, occurring around two dozen times. The Holy One is the King (6:5), the righteous and just one (26:7), the incomparable God (40:25), and the Redeemer of his people (41:14). Anyone coming to the Holy One must worship him in reverence and awe. The Holy One identifies himself with Mount Zion, called holy because it is his symbolic dwelling place (see 18:7; 24:23; 27:13; 56:7; 60:1-22).<\/p>\n<p>The Holy One stands apart from all his creation because he is morally perfect. Sinful people cannot dwell with him (see 1:4). God’s holiness requires ritual purity and moral perfection. God is a consuming fire who purges away anything that does not conform to his holy will (see 33:14).<\/p>\n<p>Yet the Holy One sets aside a remnant for himself (4:2-3; 6:13). He washes away their filth and commits to be present with them (12:6), his own redeemed people (35:8-9; 62:12; see also 49:7). He demonstrates his holy power as he comes to the aid of sinful and weak humans, rescues them from the exile that their sin creates, and opens up the new creation for them.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 71:22-23; 78:41; Prov 9:10; Isa 6:1-5; 10:17, 20; 17:7; 29:17-24; 30:15; 41:14, 17-20; 43:1-4, 10-21; 48:17-18; 54:4-5; 55:5; 57:15; Jer 50:29; 51:5; Ezek 39:7-8; Hos 11:8-9; Hab 3:3-6; John 6:66-69; Acts 2:27; 13:35; Rev 16:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Holy One of Israel The phrase The Holy One of Israel is particularly prominent in the book of Isaiah, occurring around two dozen times. The Holy One is the King (6:5), the righteous and just one (26:7), the incomparable God (40:25), and the Redeemer of his people (41:14). Anyone coming to the Holy One must worship him in reverence and awe. The Holy One identifies himself with Mount Zion, called holy because it is his symbolic dwelling place (see 18:7; 24:23; 27:13; 56:7; 60:1-22). The Hol...","summary_en":"The Holy One of Israel The phrase The Holy One of Israel is particularly prominent in the book of Isaiah, occurring around two dozen times. The Holy One is the King (6:5), the righteous and just one (26:7), the incomparable God (40:25), and the Redeemer of his people (41:14). Anyone coming to the Holy One must worship him in reverence and awe. The Holy One identifies himself with Mount Zion, called holy because it is his symbolic dwelling place (see 18:7; 24:23; 27:13; 56:7; 60:1-22). The Hol...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"67":[{"id":20217,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of John","title_en":"Gospel of John","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>The fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospels. (See discussion above on John, the Apostle.)<\/p>\n\n<p>The Gospel appears to have been written by one who knew the Jews and the Palestine of Jesus’ day well. He was familiar with Jewish messianic expectations (e.g., Jn 1:20-21; 4:25; 7:40-42; 12:34). He knew of the hostility between Jews and Samaritans (4:9) and the contempt the Pharisees had for “the people of the land” (7:49). He knew of the importance attached to the religious schools (v 15). He knew the way the Sabbath was observed and was aware of the provision that the obligation to circumcise on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath regulations (vv 22-23). Throughout the Gospel he moved with certainty in the vast range of Jewish ideas and customs.<\/p>\n<p>It is the same with topography. The writer mentioned many places, and his place-names all seem to be used correctly. He referred to Cana, a village not mentioned in any earlier literature known to us, which means that the reference almost certainly came from someone who actually knew the place. He located Bethany with some precision as about 15 stadia from Jerusalem (about 2 miles, or 3.2 kilometers, 11:18). He had several references to places in or near Jerusalem, such as Bethesda (5:2), Siloam (9:7), and the Kidron Valley (18:1). Of course, this does not rule out some contemporary of John’s, but it makes it difficult to think of the author as a much later individual writing at a distance from Palestine. The evidence as we have it indicates that the writer was a Jew in the Palestine of Jesus’ day.<\/p>\n<p>To many careful readers, it seems that the Gospel bears the stamp of an eyewitness. For example, Jesus was teaching “in the treasury” (8:20). Nothing is made of the point; the incident could easily have been told without it. It looks like a reminiscence of someone who sees the scene in his mind’s eye as he writes. The fact that the house was filled with fragrance when the woman broke the perfume jar (12:3) does not materially affect the account but is the kind of detail that one who was there would remember. The author noted that the loaves used in the feeding of the multitude were barley loaves (6:9) and that Jesus’ tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top to bottom (19:23). He told us that the branches with which Jesus was greeted were palm branches (12:13), and that it was night when Judas went out (13:30). Such touches are found throughout the Gospel, and it seems unjustified to treat them as no more than an attempt to create verisimilitude. They seem much more like indications that the author was writing about events in which he had himself taken part.<\/p>\n<p>The early church accepted Johannine authorship without question. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all see the apostle as the author. The first to quote this Gospel by name was Theophilus of Antioch, about <span>AD<\/span> 180.<\/p>\n<p>Those who object to Johannine authorship emphasize the differences between this Gospel and the Synoptics. The argument is that if Jesus was anything like the Christ portrayed by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he could not be like the Christ of the fourth Gospel. This is a completely subjective argument, ignoring the fact that any great man will appear differently to different people. The judgment of the church throughout the centuries has been that Jesus was large enough to inspire both portraits. To put the same point another way, we have no reason for holding that the first three Evangelists tell us all there is to know about Jesus. There is no contradiction. John simply brings out other aspects of Jesus’ life and teachings.<\/p>\n<p>While we cannot prove beyond all doubt that John the apostle was the author, we can say that there is more reason for holding to this view than to any other.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateOriginandDestination\">Date, Origin, and Destination<\/p>\n<p>It has been usual for conservatives and liberals alike to date this writing in the last decade of the first century or early in the second. Some liberal scholars have put it well into the second century, but this is not common, and it is remarkable that there has been such a considerable measure of agreement.<\/p>\n<p>It is said that this Gospel is dependent on the Synoptics, which means that it must be dated sometime after them. But this argument has been widely abandoned in recent times. There is so much in John that is without parallel in the other three Gospels, and conversely so much in the other three that John might have used had he known it, that it is very difficult indeed to hold that this writer had any of the other Gospels before him when he wrote, or even that he had read them. Such resemblances as there are seem better explained by common use of oral tradition.<\/p>\n<p>It is also argued that there is a very developed theology in John and that we must allow time for its development. Granted, the theology of this Gospel is profound, but this does not require that we must wait for it until the end of the first century. The theology of the Letter to the Romans is also profound, and there is no reason for dating that writing later than the 50s. On the ground of development, then, there is no reason for putting John later than Romans. Development is a slippery argument at best, for it usually takes place at uneven rates, and we have no means of knowing how fast it took place in the area where the author lived.<\/p>\n<p>Other arguments for a late date are no more conclusive. For example, it is urged that the ecclesiastical system presupposed by the Gospel is too late for the time of the apostle John, and that the sacramental system of chapters 3 and 6 must have taken time to develop. But John does not mention any sacrament. It is true that many scholars think these chapters refer to baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but the fact is that John mentions neither.<\/p>\n<p>It is not surprising in view of the way the traditional arguments have crumbled away that many in recent times are arguing that John must have been written before the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70. If it were later, why does not John have some reference to it? Some of his language appears to be earlier. In 5:2 he says there “is” (not “was”) a pool called Bethesda. And he often refers to the Twelve as Jesus’ disciples, or “his” disciples, or the like. In later times Christians usually said “the” disciples, for they saw no need to say whose the disciples were. But in the early days, when Christians were in contact with rabbis (each of whom had his disciples), it was important to show that Jesus’ disciples were in mind. It is important also that John makes no reference to any of the synoptic Gospels. The simplest explanation is that he had not seen them. They were not yet widely circulated.<\/p>\n<p>None of this enables us to date this Gospel with precision. But the weight of evidence points to an early date (before <span>AD<\/span> 70).<\/p>\n<p>The author was John the apostle, a Jew. However, the writing gives evidence of contact with Greek thought, for example, in the reference to Christ as “the Word” in chapter 1 and the translation of words like “rabbi” (1:38). It is almost universally held that such considerations compel us to see the work as originating in a center of Greek culture, and Ephesus has traditionally been favored. Before the end of the second century we have Irenaeus writing that John published the Gospel during his residence at Ephesus.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars point to similarities between John and the Odes of Solomon, which they think came from Syria. As there are also some resemblances in the language of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in the early second century, this is held to show that John was written in Syria, probably at Antioch. Others again think that Egypt was the place, and they support this by pointing out that the oldest fragment of a manuscript of this Gospel was found there. There is no real evidence, and we are left with probabilities. There is much to be said for accepting the evidence of Irenaeus and seeing Ephesus as the place of origin, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>There is no real indication of the intended destination. From 20:31 we learn that the book was written that the readers might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s Son, and that by believing they might have life. The Gospel, then, has an evangelistic aim. But it is also possible that “believe” means “keep on believing”—“go on in faith,” rather than “begin to believe.” That is to say, the book may have been meant from the beginning to build people up in the faith. Probably we should not distinguish between these aims too sharply. Both may well be in mind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Several possible backgrounds to the Gospel have been suggested. The Greek interest is obvious, and this writing has sometimes been called the Gospel of the Hellenists. The suggestion is that we should look to Greek writings, perhaps the works of the philosophers or Philo of Alexandria, to find the right background against which to understand what John has written. This approach may be seen in the work of Rudolf Bultmann, who thought specifically of Gnosticism. Indeed, for Bultmann one of the sources of this Gospel was a discourse source that he thought was taken from non-Christian Gnosticism. Not many have been prepared to follow Bultmann, but a number of recent commentators have discerned some form of Gnosticism as the backdrop to John.<\/p>\n<p>While such views are put forward seriously, there are some substantial objections. One is that, despite the confident assertions of some scholars, Gnosticism has never been shown to be earlier than Christianity. In the form in which it comes before us in history, it is a Christian heresy, and of course, the Christian faith must appear before a Christian heresy is possible. Another objection is that there is a basic difference between the two systems. Gnosticism is concerned with knowledge (the very word is derived from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">gnosis<\/span><em>,<\/em> “knowledge”). Its “redeemer” is one who comes from heaven with knowledge. But John does not subscribe to the view that man is saved by knowledge. The Redeemer comes to take away the sin of the world (1:29). Gnosticism tells people that life is an upward struggle; Christianity tells of a Savior who came down to raise them up. It is not easy to see any form of Gnosticism as the essential background to Christianity.<\/p>\n<p>Much more significant is John’s Semitic background. Especially important here is the OT, accepted as sacred Scripture by Jew and Christian alike. It lies constantly behind John’s statements, and it must be studied carefully if John is to be understood. It is plain that John knew and loved the Septuagint, the translation into Greek of the Hebrew OT. Again and again, the Septuagint can be shown to lie behind what John says.<\/p>\n<p>In modern times important discoveries have been made at Qumran, in the vicinity of the Dead Sea. Among the scrolls unearthed in the caves of this area are several that have affinities with John. Indeed, one of the interesting facts about the scrolls is that they have more parallels with John than with any other part of the NT, a fact difficult to explain if John was written late and at a distance from Palestine. The resemblances to the Qumran writings must be viewed with care, for there is often a linguistic resemblance where the thinking is quite different. For example, both use the unusual expression “the Spirit of truth.” But where John means one of the persons of the Trinity, the scrolls speak of “a spirit of truth” and “a spirit of error” striving in the souls of people. The connection is real, but John is clearly not dependent on the scrolls for his thinking. The contribution of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they afford additional evidence that this Gospel is basically Palestinian and must be understood against a background of first-century Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Other backgrounds have been suggested, such as the Hermetic literature. This is a group of writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus (“Hermes Thrice-greatest”), a designation of the Egyptian god Thoth. There are indeed some points of contact with John, but they are few in comparison with those of writings rooted in Palestine. It is difficult to take such suggestions seriously. John is essentially Palestinian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The writer told us that Jesus did many “signs” (or miracles) that he had not recorded, but “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life” (Jn 20:31, <span>nlt<\/span>). John wrote to show that Jesus is the Messiah. But he did not do this simply with a view to conveying interesting information. He wanted his readers to see this knowledge as a challenge to faith; when they believe, they will have life. John sought to bring men and women to Christ; he had an evangelistic aim. That does not exhaust what he was trying to do, for his words have meaning for believers. It is important that believers have a right knowledge of Jesus and that they continue to believe.<\/p>\n<p>The main theological teaching of this Gospel, then, is that God has sent his Messiah, Jesus. He is the very Son of God, and he comes to bring life (3:16). Though Jesus told the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, this is not often said so specifically. The avoidance of the term might well be because of the political overtones it had acquired among the Jews at large. They looked for a Messiah who would fight the Romans. He would defeat them and set up a mighty world empire with its capital in Jerusalem. Jesus was not aiming at anything like that, and it was important that he avoid the kind of language that would give that impression. But though the conventional messianic terminology is avoided, John left no doubt that Jesus was God’s chosen one. Again and again he depicted Jesus as fulfilling messianic functions. For example, in the long discourse in chapter 6 we see Jesus as the bread from heaven, fulfilling the expectation that when Messiah came, he would renew the manna; and in the giving of sight to the blind man (ch 9) we have another messianic function (cf. Is 35:5).<\/p>\n<p>With this greatness of Jesus, John also combined teaching about his lowliness. A continuing, though unobtrusive, strand of Johannine teaching is that Jesus depends on the Father for everything. Apart from the Father, Jesus said, he could do nothing (Jn 5:30). His very food is to do the Father’s will (4:34). He lives through the Father (6:57). It is the Father who gives him his disciples (6:37, 44; 17:6). It is the Father who bears witness to him (5:32, 37). John insists that Jesus is in no sense independent of the Father. In the mission of Jesus, John sees the working out of the purpose of the Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Prologue and Chapter 1<\/h5>\n<p>John begins with a prologue (1:1-18) that is unlike anything in any of the other Gospels. In it he refers to Jesus as “the Word,” a term that has points of contact with both Greek and Hebrew thinking. As John uses it, it conveys the thought that Jesus is the expression of the mind of the Father. John speaks of the Word as God (1:1), sees him as active in creation (1:3-5), goes on to the witness borne to him by John the Baptist (1:6-8), speaks of the coming of the Word into the world (1:9-14), and finishes with a section on the greatness of the Word (1:15-18). In this prologue he briefly introduces some of the great themes that will be developed throughout the Gospel. It is a majestic introduction to the whole.<\/p>\n<p>Next we have the beginnings of Jesus’ public ministry (1:19-51). Jesus’ work was preceded by that of John the Baptist, and the Evangelist tells us first about the kind of witness that the Baptist gave to Jesus. Witness is one of his important concepts, and witness is all that John the Baptist does in this Gospel. From this witness we move to the way the first disciples came to Jesus. We learn something of how Andrew and Peter came to know the Lord. We read also of Philip and Nathanael, of whom we learn little or nothing in the other Gospels.<\/p>\n<h5>The Signs and Discourses (2:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The public ministry of Jesus is described in a very distinctive way in this Gospel. John has a long section (chs 2–12) in which he tells of a number of miracles Jesus did, interweaving into his account a series of discourses. Sometimes these are addresses given to groups of people, and sometimes they are talks with individuals. Some scholars call this section of the Gospel the Book of Signs, thus emphasizing the prominent place given to seven miracles. For John they are not simply wonders. They are meaningful; in the literal sense of the term they are <em>sign<\/em>ificant.<\/p>\n<p>The first of them is the turning of the water into wine at a marriage in Cana of Galilee (2:1-11). The water in question is connected with Jewish rites of purification (v 6), and the story is surely to teach us that Jesus transforms life. He changes the water of the law into the wine of the gospel. As a result of this “sign,” his disciples believed in him (v 11). John went on to tell how Jesus went up to Jerusalem and drove the traders out of the temple. They were selling animals for sacrifice and changing money. But their business was being done in the Court of the Gentiles, the only place in the temple where a Gentile could come to meditate and pray.<\/p>\n<p>The first discourse is on the new birth (3:1-21). Jesus talked with Nicodemus, a leading Pharisee, about the necessity for radical renewal if one is to enter the kingdom. Jesus was speaking of God’s regenerating activity, not some human reformation. Following this, John records a dispute between some of John’s disciples with a Jew on the subject of purification. This opens the way for a section that shows the superiority of Jesus over John the Baptist—by the Baptist’s own confession (3:22-36).<\/p>\n<p>The second discourse is really a long conversation Jesus had with the woman of Samaria, whom he met by a well (4:1-42). It turns on “the water of life,” a term that is not fully explained in this chapter but which we later find points to the life-giving Spirit (7:38-39). This leads to the story of the second sign, the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54), notable for the fact that Jesus healed at a distance.<\/p>\n<p>The third sign is the healing of the lame man by the pool of Bethesda (5:1-18). This man had spent many years waiting for healing at the moving of the water. Jesus told him to get up and walk, and he did. Because it was done on a Sabbath, the Pharisees objected. This leads to Jesus’ third discourse, that on the divine Son (5:19-47). Here the closeness of the relationship of Jesus to the Father is stressed, and his place in the judgment is brought out. There is emphasis also on the variety of witness who encountered Jesus, which shows how reasonable it is to accept him as God’s own Son.<\/p>\n<p>John’s fourth sign is the one miracle (apart from the resurrection) found in all four Gospels: the feeding of the 5,000 (6:1-15). It is followed by Jesus’ walking on water (vv 16-21), which seems to be meant as the fifth sign (though some scholars think not; if they are right, there are only six signs). Then comes the fourth discourse, the great sermon on the bread of life (vv 22-59). Jesus is this bread, which he gives to all men and women who believe in him. There are references to eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv 50-58), which point to his death. Some have seen in them a reference to Communion, but it is hard to see why Jesus should refer in this way to an as-yet-nonexistent sacrament. Moreover, much the same effect is attributed in the same discourse to believing (vv 35, 47). It seems best to understand Jesus as meaning that people must believe in him as the one who would die for them in order for them to have life.<\/p>\n<p>There is a section detailing Peter’s affirmation of loyalty in the face of some who drifted away from the Master (6:67-71). Then we come to the fifth discourse, on the life-giving Spirit (7:1-52). John has an important explanatory point of his own when he tells us that at the time the Spirit had not been given because Jesus had not yet been glorified (v 39). The fullness of the Spirit depends on the completion of the work of Christ in his death and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>The sixth discourse tells of the light of the world (8:12-59). This aspect of Jesus’ person and ministry is dramatically brought out in the sixth sign, the healing of the man born blind (ch 9). It is a lively narrative, as the healed man conducts a spirited defense against the Pharisees who belittled Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most beautiful of all the illustrations of Jesus’ relations to his people is that on which he dwells in the seventh discourse, where he speaks of himself as the good shepherd (ch 10). There is the obvious truth that sheep depend entirely on their shepherd, but Jesus says something else. Whereas earthly shepherds live to meet the needs of their sheep, Jesus laid down his life for his sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The final sign is the raising of Lazarus (11:1-44), a man who had been dead for four days. The story graphically brings out Jesus’ power over death and his readiness to confer the gift of life. Jesus speaks of himself as “the resurrection and the life” (v 25); death cannot defeat him. He brings life to the dead, to the spiritually dead as well as to physically dead Lazarus. John goes on to note the reaction to this miracle: some believed, but some opposed Jesus (vv 45-57). He includes a notable saying of Caiaphas, the high priest, that one man should die for the people (vv 50-52). Caiaphas was speaking as a cynical politician (better one dead, however innocent, than the whole nation be troubled). But John saw in the words the deeper meaning that Jesus’ death would bring salvation to many.<\/p>\n<p>John rounds off his account of the ministry with the story of the anointing of Jesus by a woman in Bethany, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the coming of some Greeks to Jesus, and his final summary of what he had taught (ch 12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Last Supper<\/h5>\n<p>The account of what went on in the upper room on the night before the Crucifixion is the fullest of all the four Gospels. Curiously, John says nothing about the institution of Communion, a fact that has never been satisfactorily explained. But he tells us how Jesus washed the feet of the disciples (13:1-17), an action splendidly exemplifying the spirit of lowly service so soon to be shown on the cross. Then comes the prophecy of the betrayal, an action that set in motion the events that would lead to the cross (vv 18-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the long discourse that follows, Jesus dealt with some questions posed by his followers and went on to teach them some important truths, for example, that he is the way, the truth, and the life (14:6). He develops the thought that he is the true vine, the disciples being vitally joined to him as branches to the vine. It is important for the branches to remain in the vine if they are to have life (15:1-16). Then come some words about suffering that would be of help to them in times of persecution (vv 17-25). Jesus goes on to speak about the Holy Spirit (15:26–16:15). This is a very important passage, for it contains much more about the Spirit than we find elsewhere in Jesus’ words. Jesus calls the Spirit the “Paraclete,” a title not easy to understand. It is in origin a legal term, and at least we can say that it indicates that the Spirit brings friendship, encouragement, and help. Jesus went on to speak of his approaching departure from the disciples and to prepare them for the trying time ahead (16:16-33). This part of the Gospel concludes with Jesus’ great High Priestly prayer. He prayed for the disciples to be one, as he commended them to the care of the heavenly Father (ch 17).<\/p>\n<h5>The Cross and Resurrection<\/h5>\n<p>When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, he went forward to meet them and they fell to the ground (18:1-11). He gave himself over to them; they did not take him over. At the outset of his passion narrative, John was making the point that Jesus is sovereign. He was not being defeated by the march of events but was sovereignly doing the will of the Father. John is the only one to tell us that Jesus was taken before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas, the reigning high priest (18:12-14, 19-24). He tells also of Peter’s three denials of Jesus (vv 15-27). He did not spend much time on the Jewish trial, but he was much more explicit than the other Evangelists in his account of the Roman trial. Clearly, he had some special knowledge of what went on before Pilate. He presents a magnificent picture of Jesus talking with Pilate about kingship—the Son of God discussing with the representative of Caesar the meaning of sovereignty (vv 33-40).<\/p>\n<p>In his account of the Crucifixion John has a number of touches of his own, notably the way Jesus commended Mary to the care of the beloved disciple (19:26-27), the fact that the cry Jesus uttered as he died was “It is finished” (v 30), and the piercing of his side by a soldier’s spear (vv 31-37).<\/p>\n<p>John proceeds to the narrative of the burial (vv 38-42) and of the empty tomb (20:1-10). He speaks of appearances of the risen Lord to Mary Magdalene (vv 11-18), and to the disciples—both without (vv 19-23) and with Thomas (vv 24-29).<\/p>\n<p>The final chapter, an epilogue, tells of a miraculous catch of fish (21:1-14) and goes on to the moving account of Peter’s threefold declaration of love to Jesus and his restoration.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","summary_en":"JOHN, Gospel of The fourth Gospel. Preview • Author • Date, Origin, and Destination • Background • Purpose and Theological Teaching • Content Author At the end of this Gospel we are told that it was written by “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 21:20, 24), but unfortunately the book nowhere tells us who this disciple was. Evidence shows that the most probable identification is with the apostle John. He fills the place we would have expected John to fill from what we know from the other Gospe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"68":[{"id":42180,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69806,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97432,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125058,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56455,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:68","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:68","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:68-69<\/strong> <em>Simon Peter<\/em> often served as spokesman for the Twelve (see also Matt 14:28-29; 16:16; 17:4; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-35).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:68-69<\/strong> <em>Simon Peter<\/em> often served as spokesman for the Twelve (see also Matt 14:28-29; 16:16; 17:4; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:68-69 Simon Peter often served as spokesman for the Twelve (see also Matt 14:28-29; 16:16; 17:4; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-35).","summary_en":"6:68-69 Simon Peter often served as spokesman for the Twelve (see also Matt 14:28-29; 16:16; 17:4; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-35).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84081,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:68","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:68","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:68-69<\/strong> <em>Simon Peter<\/em> often served as spokesman for the Twelve (see also Matt 14:28-29; 16:16; 17:4; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-35).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:68-69<\/strong> <em>Simon Peter<\/em> often served as spokesman for the Twelve (see also Matt 14:28-29; 16:16; 17:4; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:68-69 Simon Peter often served as spokesman for the Twelve (see also Matt 14:28-29; 16:16; 17:4; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-35).","summary_en":"6:68-69 Simon Peter often served as spokesman for the Twelve (see also Matt 14:28-29; 16:16; 17:4; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-35).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111707,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:68","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:68","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:68-69<\/strong> <em>Simon Peter<\/em> often served as spokesman for the Twelve (see also Matt 14:28-29; 16:16; 17:4; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-35).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:68-69<\/strong> <em>Simon Peter<\/em> often served as spokesman for the Twelve (see also Matt 14:28-29; 16:16; 17:4; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:68-69 Simon Peter often served as spokesman for the Twelve (see also Matt 14:28-29; 16:16; 17:4; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-35).","summary_en":"6:68-69 Simon Peter often served as spokesman for the Twelve (see also Matt 14:28-29; 16:16; 17:4; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-35).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139333,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:68","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:68","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:68-69<\/strong> <em>Simon Peter<\/em> often served as spokesman for the Twelve (see also Matt 14:28-29; 16:16; 17:4; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-35).<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v\"><strong>6:68-69<\/strong> <em>Simon Peter<\/em> often served as spokesman for the Twelve (see also Matt 14:28-29; 16:16; 17:4; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:68-69 Simon Peter often served as spokesman for the Twelve (see also Matt 14:28-29; 16:16; 17:4; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-35).","summary_en":"6:68-69 Simon Peter often served as spokesman for the Twelve (see also Matt 14:28-29; 16:16; 17:4; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-35).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"69":[{"id":4760,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"and Text of the (New Testament) Bible*, Manuscripts","title_en":"and Text of the (New Testament) Bible*, Manuscripts","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, M<span>anuscripts and Text of the (New Testament)<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all copies of any work of literature were made by hand (hence, the name “manuscript”). According to a current tabulation, there are 99 papyrus manuscripts, 257 uncial manuscripts, and 2,795 minuscule manuscripts. We can add 2,209 Greek lectionaries to this list. Therefore, we have over 5,350 manuscript copies of the Greek NT or portions thereof. No other work of Greek literature can boast of such numbers.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantPapyrusManuscripts\">Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>Papyrus is a tall, aquatic reed, the pith of which is cut into strips, laid in a crosswork pattern and glued together to make a page for writing. The papyrus rolls of Egypt have been used as a writing surface since the early third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. The Greeks adopted papyrus around 900 <span>BC<\/span>, and later the Romans adopted its use. However, the oldest extant Greek rolls of papyrus date from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>. Unfortunately, papyrus is perishable, requiring a dry climate for its preservation. That is why so many papyri have been discovered in the desert sands of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The NT papyrus manuscripts (abbreviated as “P”) are generally the earliest manuscripts of the NT. Broadly speaking, the most important ones can be categorized in three groups: the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (from Oxyrhynchus, Egypt), (2) the Beatty Papyri (named after the owner); and (3) the Bodmer Papyri (named after the owner).<\/p>\n<h5>The Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>Beginning in 1898 B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt discovered thousands of papyrus fragments in the ancient rubbish heaps of Oxyrhynchus, Egypt. This site yielded volumes of papyrus fragments containing all sorts of written material (literature, business and legal contracts, letters, etc.) as well as over 40 manuscripts containing portions of the NT. Some of the more noteworthy papyrus manuscripts from Oxyrhynchus are as follows:<\/p>\n<h6>P1 (P. Oxy. 2)<\/h6>\n<p>This late second-century manuscript contains Matthew 1:1-9, 12, 14-20. Grenfell and Hunt in the winter of 1896–97 went to Oxyrhynchus (now called El Bahnasa) in search of ancient Christian documents. P1 was discovered on the second day of the dig. At the time of this discovery, this was the earliest extant copy of any NT portion—at least 100 years earlier than Codex Vaticanus. The copyist of P1 seems to have faithfully followed a very reliable exemplar. Where there are major variants, P1 agrees with the best Alexandrian witnesses, especially B (Codex Vaticanus), from which it rarely varies.<\/p>\n<h6>P5 (P. Oxy. 208 and 1781)<\/h6>\n<p>Two separate portions of this third-century manuscript were unearthed from Oxyrhynchus by Grenfell and Hunt, both from the same papyrus manuscript. The first portion contains John 1:23-31, 33-40 on one fragment and John 20:11-17 on another—probably on the first and last quires of a manuscript containing only the Gospel of John. This portion was published in volume II of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/em> in 1899; the second portion—containing John 16:14-30—was not published until 1922 in volume XV of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>After examining the first portion, Grenfell and Hunt said, “The text is a good one, and appears to have affinities with that of Codex Sinaiticus, with which the papyrus agrees in several readings not found elsewhere.” The papyrus, written in a documentary hand, is marked for its brevity.<\/p>\n<h6>P13 (P. Oxy. 657 and PSI 1292)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated between 175 and 225, contains 12 columns from a roll preserving the text of Hebrews 2:14–5:5; 10:8-22; 10:29–11:13; 11:28–12:7. The text of Hebrews was written in a reformed documentary hand on the back of the papyrus containing the new epitome of Livy. For this reason, some scholars think the manuscript was possibly brought to Egpyt by a Roman official and left behind when he left his post. P13 very often agrees with B, and it supplements B where it is lacking—namely, from Hebrews 9:14 to the end of Hebrews. P13 and P46 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P77 (P. Oxy. 2683 + 4405)<\/h6>\n<p>Dated c. 150–75, this is the earliest manuscript of Matthew (23:30-39). The manuscript is clearly a literary production. It was written in an elegant hand and has what was or became a standard system of chapter division, as well as punctuation and breathing marks. P77 has close textual affinities with Codex Sinaiticus.<\/p>\n<h6>P90 (P. Oxy. 3523)<\/h6>\n<p>This second-century manuscript (c. 150–75) contains John 18:36–19:7. The handwriting (an upright, rounded, elegant script) is much like that found in P66. Furthermore, P90 has more affinity with P66 than with any other single manuscript, though it does not concur with P66 in its entirety.<\/p>\n\n<h6>P. Oxy. 4404<\/h6>\n<p>Containing Matthew 21:34-37, 43, 45, this manuscript could be the earliest extant manuscript of the NT in that the script is early Roman and therefore could be dated to the early second century.<\/p>\n<h5>The Chester Beatty Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased from a dealer in Egypt during the 1930s by Chester Beatty and by the University of Michigan. The three manuscripts in this collection are very early and contain a large portion of the NT text. P45 (c. 200) contains portions of all four Gospels and Acts; P46 (c. 125) has almost all of Paul’s epistles and Hebrews; and P47 (third century) contains Revelation 9–17.<\/p>\n<h6>P45 (Chester Beatty Papyrus I)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has the four Gospels and Acts (Mt 20:24-32; 21:13-19; 25:41–26:39; Mk 4:36–9:31; 11:27–12:28; Lk 6:31–7:7; 9:26–14:33; Jn 4:51–5:2, 21-25; 10:7-25; 10:30–11:10, 18-36, 42-57; Acts 4:27–17:17). The order of books in the original intact manuscript was probably as follows: Matthew, John, Luke, Mark, Acts (the so-called Western order). This manuscript was dated by Kenyon to the early third century, a date that was confirmed by the papyrologists W. Schubart and H. I. Bell. This continues to be the date assigned to this manuscript in modern handbooks on textual criticism and critical editions of the Greek NT, but the consistent formation of certain letters suggests an earlier date—maybe sometime in the late second century.<\/p>\n<p>The scribe of P45 worked without any intention of exactly reproducing his source. He wrote with a great amount of freedom—harmonizing, smoothing out, substituting at will. In short, the scribe did not actually copy words. He saw through the language to its idea-content, and copied that in words of his own choosing, or in rearranged order. Thus, in the scribe of P45 we see an exegete and a paraphraser.<\/p>\n<h6>P46 (Chester Beatty Papyrus II)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has most of Paul’s epistles (excluding the Pastorals) in this order: Romans 5:17–6:14; 8:15–15:9; 15:11–16:27; Hebrews 1:1–13:25; 1 Corinthians 1:1–16:22; 2 Corinthians 1:1–13:13; Ephesians 1:1–6:24; Galatians 1:1–6:18; Philippians 1:1–4:23; Colossians 1:1–4:18; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 1:9–2:3; 5:5-9, 23-28 (with minor lacunae in each of the books).<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript was originally dated to the early third century. But others, since, have dated the manuscript earlier in the second century. The scribe who produced this manuscript used an early, excellent exemplar. He was a professional scribe because there are stichoi notations at the end of several books (see the conclusion of Romans, 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians). The stichoi were used by professionals to note how many lines had been copied for commensurate pay. Most likely, the ex officio of the scriptorium (perhaps connected with a church library) paginated the codex and indicated the stichoi. The scribe himself made a few corrections as he went, and then several other readers made corrections here and there.<\/p>\n<p>The text of P46 shows a strong affinity with B (especially in Ephesians, Colossians, and Hebrews) and next with א (Codex Sinaiticus). P46 agrees much less with the later representatives of the Alexandrian text. In short, P46 is proto-Alexandrian. In Hebrews, P46 and P13 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P47 (Chester Beatty Papyrus III)<\/h6>\n<p>This third-century codex contains Revelation 9:10–17:2. The text of P47 agrees more often with that of Codex Sinaiticus than with any other manuscript (including Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus), though it often shows independence.<\/p>\n<h5>The Bodmer Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased by M. Martin Bodmer from a dealer in Egypt during the 1950s and 1960s. The three important papyri in this collection are P66 (c. 175, containing almost all of John), P72 (third century, having all of 1 and 2 Peter and Jude), and P75 (c. 200, containing large parts of Luke 3—John 15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h4\" id=\"P66\">P66 (Papyrus Bodmer II)<\/p>\n<p>This manuscript contains most of John’s Gospel (1:1–6:11; 6:35–14:26, 29-30; 15:2-26; 16:2-4, 6-7; 16:10–20:20, 22-23; 20:25–21:9). The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11), making it the earliest witness to not include this spurious passage. The manuscript is usually dated as c. 200, but the renowned paleographer Herbert Hunger has argued that P66 should be dated to the first half, if not the first quarter, of the second century.<\/p>\n<p>According to recent studies, it seems evident that P66 has preserved the work of three individuals: the original scribe, a thoroughgoing corrector, and a minor corrector. With a practiced calligraphic hand, the original scribe of P66 wrote in larger print as he went along in order to fill out the codex. The large print throughout indicates that it was written to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The text exhibits the scribe’s knowledge of other portions of Scripture (inasmuch as he harmonized John 6:69 to Matthew 16:16 and John 21:6 to Luke 5:5), his use of standard <em>nomina sacra<\/em> (a way of writing divine names), and his special use of <em>nomina sacra<\/em> for the words “cross” and “crucify.”<\/p>\n<p>The original scribe was quite free in his interaction with the text; he produced several singular readings that reveal his independent interpretation of the text. While the numerous scribal mistakes would seem to indicate that the scribe was inattentive, many of the singular readings—prior to correction—reveal that he was not detached from the narrative of the text. Rather, he became so absorbed in his reading that he often forgot the exact words he was copying. His task as a copyist was to duplicate the exemplar word for word, but this was frustrated by the fact that he was reading the text in logical semantic chunks and often became a coproducer of a new text. As a result, he continually had to stop his reading and make many in-process corrections. But he left several places uncorrected, which were later fixed by the <em>diorthotes<\/em> (official corrector). The finished product is quite good, presenting a text that is very close to the Alexandrian witnesses.<\/p>\n<h6>P72 (Papyrus Bodmer VII–VIII)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated late third century, has an interesting collection of writings in one codex: 1 Peter 1:1–5:14; 2 Peter 1:1–3:18; Jude 1:1-25; the Nativity of Mary, the apocryphal correspondence of Paul to the Corinthians, the eleventh ode of Solomon, Melito’s Homily on the Passover, a fragment of a hymn, the Apology of Phileas, and Psalms 33 and 34.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars think that four scribes took part in producing the entire manuscript. First Peter has clear Alexandrian affinities—especially with B. Second Peter and (especially) Jude display more of an uncontrolled type text (usually associated with the “Western” text), with several independent readings.<\/p>\n<h6>P75 (Papyrus Bodmer XIV–XV)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex contains most of Luke and John (Lk 3:18–4:2; 4:34–5:10; 5:37–18:18; 22:4–24:53; Jn 1:1–11:45, 48-57; 12:3–13:1, 8-9; 14:8-30; 15:7-8.) The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11). The manuscript can be dated to the late second or early third century.<\/p>\n<p>The copyist of P75 was a literate scribe trained in making books. His craftsmanship shows through in his tight calligraphy and controlled copying. The handwriting displayed in this manuscript is typically called by paleographers the common angular type of the late second to early third century. The scribe’s Christianity shows in his abbreviations of the <em>nomina sacra<\/em><em>,<\/em> as well as in his abbreviation of the word “cross.” These are telltale signs of a scribe who belonged to the Christian community. Furthermore, the large typeface indicates that the manuscript was composed to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The scribe even added a system of sectional divisions to aid any would-be lector. Thus, we have a manuscript written by a Christian for other Christians.<\/p>\n<p>There are several indications of the scribe’s Alexandrian orientation. First and foremost is his scriptoral acumen. He is the best of all the early Christian scribes, and his manuscript is an extremely accurate copy. P75 is the work of an extremely disciplined scribe who copied with the intention of being careful and accurate. Scholars generally agree that P75 displays the kind of text that was used in making Codex Vaticanus (there is 87 percent agreement between P75 and B). As such, textual scholars have a high regard for P75’s textual fidelity.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Other Papyrus Manuscripts<\/h5>\n<h6>P4 + P64 + P67<\/h6>\n<p>These three papyrus manuscripts are part of one codex dated <span>AD<\/span> 150–175. The manuscript was the work of a professional scribe, and the text is extremely accurate.<\/p>\n<h6>P32 (Rylands Papyrus 5)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, preserving Titus 1:11-15; 2:3-8, is dated c. 175, making it the earliest extant copy of any of the Pastoral Epistles. P32 shows agreement with א and with F and G. Since F and G (nearly identical manuscripts) go back to the same archetype, it is possible that P32 could be linked to the same source.<\/p>\n<h6>P52 (Rylands Papyrus 457)<\/h6>\n<p>This fragment, containing John 18:31-34, 37-38, is noteworthy because of its date: c. 110–125. Many scholars (F. Kenyon, H. I. Bell, A. Deissmann, and W. H. P. Hatch) have confirmed this dating. The manuscript came from the Fayum or Oxyrhynchus site. It was acquired in 1920 by Grenfell, but it remained unnoticed among hundreds of papyri until 1934, when C. H. Roberts recognized that this fragment preserves a few verses from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantUncialManuscripts\">Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>The manuscripts typically classified as “uncial” are so designated to differentiate them from papyrus manuscripts. In a sense, this is a misnomer because the real difference has to do with the material they are written on—vellum (treated animal hide) as compared to papyrus—not the kind of letters used. Indeed, the papyri are also written in uncials (capital letters), but the term “uncial” typically describes the majuscule lettering that was prominent in fourth-century biblical texts, such as in א, A, B, C.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Sinaiticus (or א)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex contains the entire OT and the NT in this order: the four Gospels, the Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews), Acts, the General Epistles, Revelation. It also includes the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. The codex cannot be earlier than 340 (the year Eusebius died) because the Eusebian sections of the text are indicated in the margins of the Gospels by a contemporary hand. Most scholars date it 350–375.<\/p>\n<p>This codex was discovered by Constantin von Tischendorf in St Catherine’s Monastery (situated at the foot of Mt Sinai). On a visit to the monastery in 1844 he noticed in a wastebasket some parchment leaves that were being used to light the lamps. He was allowed to take this waste paper, which proved to be 43 leaves from various parts of the Greek translation of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>In 1853 he made a second trip to the monastery and found nothing. In 1859, however, on his third trip, he found not only other parts of the OT but also the complete NT. He was finally able to persuade the monastery authorities to present the manuscript to the czar, the great patron of the Greek Catholic Church, who placed it in the Imperial Library in St Petersburg. The czar gave great honors to the monastery and its authorities, and everybody seemed well pleased. Later Tischendorf was charged with having stolen the manuscript from its lawful owners, but the better textual scholars do not accept that story.<\/p>\n\n<p>The manuscript remained in the Imperial Library until 1933, when it was purchased by the British Museum for the huge sum of £100,000 (about $500,000). Textual criticism made the headlines because one manuscript was bought for this much money, raised largely by public subscription during the Great Depression. The manuscript is now on display in the manuscript room of the museum, where it is considered one of its most prized possessions.<\/p>\n<p>The text of Sinaiticus is very closely related to that of Codex Vaticanus. They agree in presenting the purest type of text, usually called the Alexandrian text type. Tischendorf greatly used the textual evidence of Codex Sinaiticus in preparing his critical editions of the Greek NT. Tischendorf thought four scribes had originally produced the codex, whom he named scribes A, B, C, D. After reinvestigation, H. J. Milne and T. C. Skeat identified only three scribes: A (who wrote the historical and poetical books of the OT, as well as most of the NT), B (who wrote the Prophets and the Shepherd of Hermas), and D (who wrote some Psalms, Tobit, Judith, and 4 Maccabees, and redid small sections of the NT). Milne and Skeat demonstrated that scribe A of Codex Vaticanus was likely the same scribe as scribe D of Codex Sinaiticus. If this true, then א is contemporary with B—perhaps produced in the same scriptorium in Alexandria. Codex Sinaiticus provides a fairly reliable witness to the NT; however, the scribe was not as careful as the scribe of B.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Alexandrinus (A)<\/h5>\n<p>This is one of the three most important codices containing early copies of the whole Bible in Greek (the other two being the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus codexes). The name Alexandrinus comes from ancient records suggesting that it was copied in Egypt during the early part of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. The early history of this manuscript and its Egyptian provenance is partially revealed by its flyleaves. A note by Cyril of Lucar (patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople in the 1620s) states that, according to tradition, it was written by Thecla, a noble lady of Egypt shortly after the Council of Nicaea (325) and that her name was originally inscribed at the end of the volume but the last page was lost due to mutilation. An Arabic note of the 13th or 14th century also says that the manuscript was written by “Thecla the martyr.” Another Arabic note says that is was presented to the patriarchal cell of Alexandria (c. 1098). Cyril of Lucar took the manuscript from Alexandria to Constantinople in 1621 and then gave it to Charles I of England in 1627, where it became part of the Royal Library, then later the British Museum.<\/p>\n<p>Only 773 of the original 820 or so pages still exist. The rest were lost as the book was passed down through the centuries. The surviving parts of Alexandrinus contain a Greek translation of the whole OT, the Apocrypha (including four books of Maccabees and Psalm 151), most of the NT, and some early Christian writings (of which the First and Second Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians are the most important).<\/p>\n<p>Frederick Kenyon thought the codex was the work of five scribes, to each of whom he designated a Roman numeral. According to Kenyon, scribes I and II copied the OT; scribe III did Matthew, Mark, 1 Corinthians 10:8—Philemon 1:25; scribe IV did Luke—Acts, General Epistles, Romans 1:1—1 Corinthians 10:8; and scribe V did Revelation. Milne and Skeat, however, argued that the whole codex was the work of two copyists (I and II). W. H. P. Hatch noted that many corrections have been made in the manuscript, most of them at an early date. Some of these corrections were introduced by the scribe himself, and others came from later hands.<\/p>\n<p>Evidently, the scribes of this codex used exemplars of varying quality for various sections of the NT. The exemplar used for the Gospels was of poor quality, reflecting a Byzantine text type. Its testimony in the Epistles is much better, and in Revelation it provides the best witness to the original text.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Codex Vaticanus (B)<\/h5>\n<p>Codex Vaticanus is the Vatican Manuscript, so named because it is the most famous manuscript in the Vatican Library in Rome. This manuscript has been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1475, but it was not made available to scholars, such as Constantin von Tischendorf and Samuel Tregelles, until the middle of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>At one time, the codex contained the whole Greek Bible, including most of the books of the Apocrypha, but it has lost many of its leaves. Originally it must have had about 820 leaves (1,640 pp), but now it has 759—617 in the OT and 142 in the NT. The major gaps of the manuscript are Genesis 1:1–46:28; 2 Samuel 2:5-7, 10-13; Psalms 106:27–138:6; Hebrews 9:14–13:25; the Pastoral Epistles; and Revelation. Each leaf measures ten and a half by ten inches (26.7 by 25.4 centimeters). Each page has three columns (two for the poetical books) with 40 to 44 lines to the column. The manuscript was written by two different scribes. It is dated in the early to middle part of the fourth century. It is not known where the manuscript originated, but it has been in the Vatican Library from the time of its earliest catalog in 1475.<\/p>\n\n<p>When Napoleon conquered Rome, he brought its treasures to Paris, including this manuscript. The scholar Hug identified it and called the attention of other scholars to it. After the downfall of Napoleon, the manuscript was returned to the Vatican Library. Competent textual scholars were not allowed to do careful work on it until a photographic edition was published in 1890. It is now on exhibit in the Vatican Library.<\/p>\n<p>The text of the Vatican Manuscript is much like that of Codex Sinaiticus. These are generally recognized as the two finest examples of the Alexandrian type of Greek text of the NT. The Greek text of the OT is very fine too, but it is not quite so important, as the original language of the OT was Hebrew. Virtually all the textual scholars since the days of Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort (who brought out their Greek Testament, including their theory of textual criticism, in 1881), recognize this neutral type of text as a very early text and a very pure text, an extremely accurate reproduction of what the original text must have been. Westcott and Hort called it a second-century text accurate in 999 out of 1,000 words so far as any matter of translatable difference was concerned. א and B are the finest examples of this type of text, but it is also found in a few other Greek uncial manuscripts, a few of the early translations, and in the writings of a few of the early church fathers. Since the days of Westcott and Hort, their theory has been confirmed by the discovery of some papyrus manuscripts, notably the Bodmer Papyri, discovered in the 1950s.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex is a palimpsest (the original writing was erased and different words written on the same material). It originally contained the entire Bible but now has only parts of six OT books and portions of all NT books except 2 Thessalonians and 2 John. The single-column Bible text, written in the 5th century <span>AD<\/span>, was erased in the 12th century and replaced by a two-column text of a Greek translation of sermons or treatises by a certain Ephraem, a 4th-century Syrian church leader. Such a practice was common in periods of economic depression or when parchment was scarce. The original writing was scraped from the writing surface and the surface smoothed. Then new compositions could be written on the prepared surface. Using chemicals Tischendorf was able to read much of the erased document.<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript may have been brought from the east to Florence by a learned Greek named Andrew John Lascar in the time of Lorenzo de’Medici. Since Lascar was known as Rhyndacenus (from the river Rhyndacus), he probably came from the region of Phrygia (site of ancient Laodicea). Where the manuscript was prior to this is not known. The Ephraemi manuscript was brought to Italy in the early sixth century, where it became the property of the Medici family. Catherine de’Medici took it to France, where it remains today.<\/p>\n<p>The text of this manuscript is mixed—it is compounded from all the major text types, agreeing frequently with the later koine of Byzantine type, which most scholars regard as the least valuable type of NT text.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Bezae (D)<\/h5>\n<p>This is a Greek-Latin diglot containing Matthew—Acts, 3 John, with lacunae. Most scholars date it late fourth or early fifth century (c. 400). Some scholars think the codex was produced in either Egypt or North Africa by a scribe whose mother tongue was Latin. Another scholar (D. C. Parker) has argued that it was copied in Beirut, a center of Latin legal studies during the fifth century, where both Latin and Greek were used. Evidently, it was produced by a scribe who knew Latin better than Greek, and then was corrected by several scribes. In any event, the codex somehow came into the hands of Theodore Beza, French scholar and successor to Calvin. Beza gave it to the Cambridge University Library in 1581.<\/p>\n<p>This codex is probably the most controversial of the NT uncials because of its marked independence. Its many additions, omissions, and alterations (especially in Luke and Acts) are the work of a significant theologian. A few earlier manuscripts (P29, P38, P48, and 0171) appear to be precursors to the type of text found in D, which is considered the principal witness of the Western text-type. Thus, Codex Bezae could be a copy of an earlier revised edition. This reviser must have been a scholar who had a propensity for adding historical, biographical, and geographical details. More than anything, he was intent on filling in gaps in the narrative by adding circumstantial details.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Washingtonianus, or The Freer Gospels (W)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex, dated around 400, has the four Gospels and Acts. It is often referred to as the Freer Gospels—named after its owner, Charles Freer. The codex likely came from the ruins of a monastery near Giza. The handwriting is quite similar to that found in a fifth-century fragment of the book of Enoch found at Akhmim in 1886.<\/p>\n<p>Codex W was copied from a parent manuscript (exemplar) that had been pieced together from several different manuscripts. This is obvious because the textual presentation of W is noticeably variegated and even the stratification of the text is matched by similar variations in paragraphing. The scribe who collated the parent manuscript drew upon various sources to put together his Gospel codex. It is likely that the scribe of the parent manuscript used a text that came from North Africa (the “Western” text) for the first part of Mark, and the scribe of W used manuscripts from Antioch for Matthew and the second part of Luke to fill the gaps in the more ancient manuscript he was copying. Detailed textual analysis reveals the variegated textual stratifications of W, as follows: in Matthew the text is Byzantine; in Mark the text is first Western (1:1–5:30), then Caesarean in Mark 5:31–16:20 (akin to P45); in Luke the text is first Alexandrian (1:1–8:12), then Byzantine. John is more complicated because the first part of John (1:1–5:11), which fills a quire, was the work of a seventh-century scribe who must have replaced a damaged quire. (W<span>s<\/span> designates the work of this scribe.) This first section has a mixture of Alexandrian and Western readings, as does the rest of John.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex 1739<\/h5>\n<p>This tenth-century codex has Acts and the Epistles. The manuscript was discovered at Mt Athos in 1879 by E. von der Goltz. The manuscript has strong textual affinities with P46, B, 1739, Coptic Sahidic, Coptic Boharic, Clement, and Origen. The relationship between P46, B, and 1739 is remarkable because 1739 is a tenth-century manuscript that was copied from a fourth-century manuscript of excellent quality. According to a colophon, the scribe of 1739 for the Pauline Epistles followed a manuscript that came from Caesarea in the library of Pamphilus and that contained an Origenian text. The three manuscripts, P46, B, and 1739, form a clear textual line: from P46 (early second century) to B (early fourth century) to 1739 (tenth century based on fourth century).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTextoftheNewTestament\">The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The original text of the NT is the “published” text—that is, the text as it was in its final edited form and released for circulation in the Christian community. For some books of the NT, there is little difference between the original composition and the published text. After the author wrote or dictated his work, he (or an associate) made the final editorial corrections and then released it for distribution. As is the case for books published in modern times, so in ancient times, the original writing of the author is not always the same as what is published—due to the editorial process. Nonetheless, the author is credited with the final edited text, and the published book is attributed to the author and considered the autograph. This autograph is the original published text. Of course, in this case the autographs do not exist, so scholars have to rely on copies to recover or reconstruct the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars think it is impossible to recover the original text of the Greek NT because they have not been able to reconstruct the early history of textual transmission. Other modern scholars are less pessimistic but still quite guarded in affirming the possiblity. And yet others are optimistic because we possess many early manuscripts of excellent quality and because our view of the early period of textual transmission has been getting clearer and clearer.<\/p>\n<p>When we speak of recovering the text of the NT, we are referring to individual books of the NT, not to the entire volume per se, because each book (or group of books—such as the Pauline Epistles) had its own unique history of textual transmission. The earliest extant copy of an entire NT text is the one preserved in Codex Sinaiticus (written about <span>AD<\/span> 375). (Codex Vaticanus lacks the Pastoral Epistles and Revelation.) Prior to the fourth century, the NT was circulated in its various parts: as a single book or a group of books (such as the four Gospels or the Pauline Epistles). Manuscripts from the late first century to the third century have been found with individual books such as Matthew (P1, P77), Mark (P88), Luke (P69), John (P5, 22, 52, 66), Acts (P91), Revelation (P18, 47), or containing groups of books, such as the four Gospels with Acts (P45), the Pauline Epistles (P30, P46, P92), the Petrine Epistles and Jude (P72). Each of the books of the NT has had its own textual history and has been preserved with varying degrees of accuracy. Nonetheless, all of the books were altered from the original state due to the process of manual copying decade after decade and century after century. And the text of each of the books needs to be recovered.<\/p>\n<p>The NT text was affected with many variations in its early history. In the late first and early second century, the oral traditions and the written word existed side by side with equal status—especially with respect to the material of the Gospels. Often, the text was changed by scribes attempting to conform the written message to the oral tradition or attempting to conform one Gospel account to another. By the end of the second century and into the third century, many of the significant variant readings entered into the textual stream.<\/p>\n<p>The early period of textual transmission, however, was not completely marred by textual infidelity and scribal liberty. There were those scribes who copied the text faithfully and reverently—that is, they recognized that they were copying a sacred text written by an apostle. The formalization of canonization did not ascribe this sacredness to the text. Canonization came about as the result of common, historical recognition of the sacredness of various NT books. Certain NT books, such as the four Gospels, Acts, and Paul’s epistles were considered inspired literature from the onset. As such, certain scribes copied them with reverential fidelity.<\/p>\n<p>Other scribes, however, felt free to make “improvements” in the text—either in the interest of doctrine and harmonization or due to the influence of a competitive oral tradition. The manuscripts produced in such a manner created a kind of “popular text”—i.e., an uncontrolled text. (This text type used to be called the “Western text,” but scholars now recognize this as a misnomer.)<\/p>\n<p>During the second century, there were a few men who produced recensions of the NT text. According to Eusebius, Theodotus (and his followers) altered the text for their own purposes. In the middle of the second century, Marcion expunged his copies of the Gospel according to Luke of all references to the Jewish background of Jesus, and Tatian’s harmony of the Gospels contains several textual alterations that gave support to ascetic views. And yet another recendor created the D-type text for the Gospels and Acts. This theologically minded redactor, living in the late second or third century, created a text that had short-lived popularity. Three third-century papyri, P29, P38, P48, each containing a portion from the book of Acts, may be precursors to the D-type text in Acts. But there are other papyri containing portions of Acts that provide even earlier testimony to a purer form of Acts—namely, P45 (c. 150) and P91 (c. 200), thereby showing that the D-type text of Acts did not necessarily antedate the purer form.<\/p>\n<p>Besides these endeavors—which are all noted for creating textual impurities—there was no recension of the NT text in the second century. Rather, it was a period in which there were scribes who exercised freedom in copying and those who demonstrated acumen. The manuscripts produced by the latter are those that come closest to preserving the original text. A prime example of an accurate late-second-century manuscript is P75.<\/p>\n<p>It is a well-known fact that the text produced by the scribe of P75 is a very accurate manuscript. It is also well-known that P75 was the kind of manuscript used in formulating Codex Vaticanus—the readings of P75 and B are remarkably similar. Prior to the discovery of P75, certain scholars thought Codex Vaticanus was the work of a fourth-century recension; others (chiefly Hort) thought it must trace back to a very early and accurate copy. Hort said that Codex Vaticanus preserves “not only a very ancient text, but a very pure line of a very ancient text” (Westcott and Hort, <em>The<\/em> <em>Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> pp 250–51). P75 appears to have shown that Hort was right.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the discovery of P75, many textual scholars were convinced that the second- and third-century papyri displayed a text in flux, a text characterized only by individual independence. The Chester Beatty Papyrus, P45, and the Bodmer Papyri, P66 and P72 (in 2 Peter and Jude), show this kind of independence. Scholars thought that scribes at Alexandria must have used several such texts to produce a good recension—as is exhibited in Codex Vaticanus. But we now know that Codex Vaticanus was not the result of a scholarly recension, resulting from editorial selection across the various textual histories. Rather, it is now quite clear that Codex Vaticanus was simply a copy (with some modifications) of a manuscript much like P75, not a fourth-century recension.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars may point out that this does not automatically mean that P75 and B represent the original text. What it does mean, they say, is that we have a second-century manuscript showing great affinity with a fourth-century manuscript whose quality has been highly esteemed. But various scholars have demonstrated that there was no Alexandrian recension before the time of P75 (late second century) and B (early fourth) and that both these manuscripts represent a relatively pure form of preservation of a relatively pure line of descent from the original text.<\/p>\n<p>The current view about the early text is that certain scribes in Alexandria and\/or scribes familiar with Alexandrian scriptoral practices (perhaps those in Oxyrhynchus) were probably responsible for maintaining a relatively pure text throughout the second, third, and fourth centuries. The Alexandrian scribes, associated with or actually employed by the scriptorium of the great Alexandrian library and\/or members of the scriptorium associated with the catechetical school at Alexandria (called the <em>Didaskelion<\/em>), were trained philologists, grammarians, and textual critics. Their work on the NT was not recensional—that is, it was not an organized emendation of the text. Rather, the work of purification and preservation was probably done here and there by various individuals trained in text criticism. This is apparent in the production of P66, which contains the Gospel of John. This manuscript was probably produced in an Egyptian scriptorium by a novice scribe who made many blunders, which were subsequently corrected by another scribe working in the same scriptorium. The first text produced by the novice could be classified as being very “free,” but the corrected text is far more accurate. (See the discussion on this manuscript above.)<\/p>\n<p>What appears to have happened with the copying of the NT text in the early period in Egypt has been poignantly characterized by Zuntz. He said that when a book was immensely popular (such as Homer’s <em>Iliad<\/em> and <em>Odyssey,<\/em> or Plato’s writings), it was copied with wild enthusiasm by novice and scholar alike. But when grammarians and scribes got ahold of it, they tried to rid it of textual corruption. In the process, however, they may have obliterated some authentic readings, but not many. Thus, the popular text (also known as the “Western text”) could have preserved the original wording in some cases. The popular or free kind of text is displayed in several third-century manuscripts: P9, P37, P40, P45, P72, and P78.<\/p>\n<p>In brief, this popular text is usually displayed in any kind of manuscript that was not produced by Alexandrian influences. This text, given to independence, is not as trustworthy as the Alexandrian text type. But because the Alexandrian text is known as a polished text, the popular text sometimes preserved the original wording. When a variant reading has the support of “Western” and Alexandrian texts, it is very likely original; but when the two are divided, the Alexandrian witnesses more often preserve the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>One dilemma still remains for some textual critics. They cannot explain how a P75\/B-type text coexisted with a Western-type text in the second century. All that can be said is that the Western text generally appears to be inferior to the P75\/B-type text. Of course, this kind of judgment troubles certain scholars, who point out that the esteem given to B and P75 is based on a subjective appreciation of the kind of text they contain (as over against the Western text) rather than on any kind of theoretical reconstruction of the early transmission of the text. This same subjective estimation was at work when Westcott and Hort decided that B was intrinsically superior to D (see their <em>Introduction,<\/em> pp 32–42). Yet the praxis of textual criticism time and again demonstrates that the P75\/B-type text is intrinsically superior to the Western text.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, the manuscripts that represent a pure preservation of the original text are usually those called “Alexandrian.” Some scholars, such as Bruce Metzger, have called the earlier manuscripts “protoAlexandrian,” for they (or manuscripts like them) are thought of as being used to compose an Alexandrian-type text. However, this is looking at things from the perspective of the fourth century. We should look at things from the second century onward and then compare fourth-century manuscripts to those of the second. The second-century manuscripts could still be called “Alexandrian” in the sense that they were produced under Alexandrian influences. Perhaps a distinguishing terminology could be “early Alexandrian” (pre-Constantine) and “later Alexandrian” (post-Constantine). Manuscripts designated as “early Alexandrian” would generally be purer, less editorialized. Manuscripts designated “later Alexandrian” would display editorialization, as well as the influence of other textual traditions.<\/p>\n<p>The “early Alexandrian” text is reflected in many second- and third-century manuscripts. On the top of the list is P75 (c. 175), the work of a competent and careful scribe. Not far behind in quality is P4+P64+P67 (c. 150), the work of an excellent copyist. Other extremely good copies are P1 (c. 200), P20 (early third century), P23 (c. 200), P27 (third century), P28 (third century), P32 (c. 150), P39 (third century), P46 (c. 125), P65 (third century), P66 (in its corrected form—P66<span>c<\/span>; c. 150), P70 (third century), P77 (c. 150), P87 (c. 125), P90 (c. 175), and P91 (c. 200). Several of these manuscripts have been placed in the “strict” category by textual critics Kurt and Barbara Aland—that is, they exhibit “strict” scribal control and therefore are accurate copies of an exemplar, if not the original. These manuscripts are P1, P23, P35, P37, P39, P64\/67, P65, P70, and P75.<\/p>\n<p>The “later Alexandrian” text, which displays editorial polishing, is exhibited in a few manuscripts, such as א (fourth century), T (fifth century), ע (seventh century), L (eighth century), 33 (ninth century), 1739 (a tenth-century manuscript copied from a fourth-century Alexandrian manuscript much like P46), and 579 (13th century). Beginning in the fifth century, Byzantine-type manuscripts began to make their influence in Egypt. Some manuscripts dated around 400 that came from Egypt clearly reflect this influence; Codex Alexandrinus (A) is probably the best example. Other Egyptian manuscripts of this era, such as Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Codex Washingtonianus (W) display large-scale harmonization, which cannot be directly linked to any kind of recension.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the third century, another kind of Greek text came into being and then grew in popularity until it became the dominant text-type throughout Christendom. This is the text-type first instigated by Lucian of Antioch, according to Jerome (in his introduction to his Latin translation of the Gospels). Lucian’s text was a definite recension (i.e., a purposely created edition)—as opposed to the Alexandrian text-type that came about as the result of a process wherein the Alexandrian scribes, upon comparing many manuscripts, attempted to preserve the best text—thereby serving more as textual critics than editors. Of course, the Alexandrians did do some editing—such as we would call copy-editing. The Lucianic text is the outgrowth and culmination of the popular text; it is characterized by smoothness of language, which is achieved by the removal of obscurities and awkward grammatical constructions and by the conflation of variant readings. Lucian (and\/or his associates) must have used many different kinds of manuscripts of varying qualities to produce a harmonized, edited NT text. The kind of editorial work that went into the Lucianic text is what we would call substantive editing.<\/p>\n<p>Lucian’s text was produced prior to the Diocletian persecution (c. 303), during which time many copies of the NT were confiscated and destroyed. Not long after this period of devastation, Constantine came to power and then recognized Christianity as the state religion. There was, of course, a great need for copies of the NT to be made and distributed to churches throughout the Mediterranean world. It was at this time that Lucian’s text began to be propagated by bishops going out from the Antiochan school to churches throughout the East, taking the text with them. Lucian’s text soon became the standard text of the Eastern church and formed the basis for the Byzantine text—and is thus the ultimate authority for the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>While Lucian was forming his recension of the NT text, the Alexandrian text was taking on its final shape. As was mentioned earlier, the formation of the Alexandrian text-type was the result of a process (as opposed to a single editorial recension). The formation of the Alexandrian text involved minor textual criticism (i.e., selecting variant readings among various manuscripts) and copyediting (i.e., producing a readable text). There was far less tampering with the text in the Alexandrian text-type than in the Lucian, and the underlying manuscripts for the Alexandrian text-type were superior to those used by Lucian. Perhaps Hesychius was responsible for giving the Alexandrian text its final shape, and Athanasius of Alexandria may have been the one who made this text the archetypal text for Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>As the years went by, there were fewer and fewer Alexandrian manuscripts produced, and more and more Byzantine manuscripts manufactured. Very few Egyptians continued to read Greek (with the exception of those in St Catherine’s Monastery, the site of the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus), and the rest of the Mediterranean world turned to Latin. It was only those in the Greek-speaking churches in Greece and Byzantium that continued to make copies of the Greek text. For century after century—from the 6th to the 14th—the great majority of NT manuscripts were produced in Byzantium, all bearing the same kind of text. When the first Greek NT was printed (c. 1525), it was based on a Greek text that Erasmus had compiled, using a few late Byzantine manuscripts. This printed text, with minor revisions, became the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>Beginning in the 17th century, earlier manuscripts began to be discovered—manuscripts with a text that differed from that found in the Textus Receptus. Around 1630, Codex Alexandrinus was brought to England. An early fifth-century manuscript, containing the entire NT, it provided a good, early witness to the NT text (it is an especially good witness to the original text of Revelation). Two hundred years later, a German scholar named Constantin von Tischendorf discovered Codex Sinaiticus in St Catherine’s Monastery (located near Mt Sinai). The manuscript, dated around <span>AD<\/span> 360, is one of the two oldest vellum (treated animal hide) manuscripts of the Greek NT. The earliest vellum manuscript, Codex Vaticanus, had been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1481, but it had not been made available to scholars until the middle of the 19th century. This manuscript, dated slightly earlier (<span>AD<\/span> 350) than Codex Sinaiticus, had both the OT and NT in Greek, excluding the last part of the NT (Hebrews 9:15 to Revelation 22:21 and the Pastoral Epistles). A hundred years of textual criticism has determined that this manuscript is one of the most accurate and reliable witnesses to the original text.<\/p>\n<p>Other early and important manuscripts were discovered in the 19th century. Through the tireless labors of men like Constantin von Tischendorf, Samuel Tregelles, and F. H. A. Scrivener, manuscripts such as Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, Codex Zacynthius, and Codex Augiensis were deciphered, collated, and published.<\/p>\n<p>As the various manuscripts were discovered and made public, certain scholars labored to compile a Greek text that would more closely represent the original text than did the Textus Receptus. Around 1700 John Mill produced an improved Textus Receptus, and in the 1730s Johannes Albert Bengel (known as the father of modern textual and philological studies in the NT) published a text that deviated from the Textus Receptus according to the evidence of earlier manuscripts.<\/p>\n<p>In the 1800s certain scholars began to abandon the Textus Receptus. Karl Lachman, a classical philologist, produced a fresh text (in 1831) that represented the fourth-century manuscripts. Samuel Tregelles (self-taught in Latin, Hebrew, and Greek), laboring throughout his entire lifetime, concentrated all of his efforts in publishing one Greek text (which came out in six parts, from 1857 to 1872). As is stated in the introduction to this work, Tregelles’s goal was “to exhibit the text of the NT in the very words in which it has been transmitted on the evidence of ancient authority.” Henry Alford also compiled a Greek text based upon the best and earliest manuscripts. In his preface to <em>The Greek New Testament<\/em> (a multivolume commentary on the Greek NT, published in 1849), Alford said he labored for the “demolition of the unworthy and pedantic reverence for the received text, which stood in the way of all chance of discovering the genuine word of God.”<\/p>\n<p>During this same era, Tischendorf was devoting a lifetime of labor to discovering manuscripts and producing accurate editions of the Greek NT. In a letter to his fiancé he wrote, “I am confronted with a sacred task, the struggle to regain the original form of the NT.” In fulfillment of his desire, he discovered Codex Sinaiticus, deciphered the palimpsest Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, collated countless manuscripts, and produced several editions of the Greek NT (the eighth edition is considered the best).<\/p>\n<p>Aided by the work of the previous scholars, two British men, Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort, worked together for 28 years to produce a volume entitled <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek<\/em> (1881). Along with this publication, they made known their theory (which was chiefly Hort’s) that Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus (along with a few other early manuscripts) represented a text that most closely replicated the original writing. They called this text the Neutral Text. (According to their studies, the Neutral Text described certain manuscripts that had the least amount of textual corruption.) This is the text that Westcott and Hort relied upon for compiling their volume.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th century was a fruitful era for the recovery of the Greek NT; the 20th century, no less so. Those living in the 20th century have witnessed the discovery of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, the Chester Beatty Papyri, and the Bodmer Papyri. To date, there are nearly 100 papyri containing portions of the NT—several of which date from the late first century to the early fourth century. These significant discoveries, providing scholars with many ancient manuscripts, have greatly enhanced the effort to recover the original wording of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>At the beginning of the 20th century, Eberhard Nestle used the best editions of the Greek NT produced in the 19th century to compile a text that represented the majority consensus. The work of making new editions was carried on by his son for several years, and then came under the care of Kurt Aland. The latest edition (the 27th) of Nestle-Aland’s <em>Novum Testamentum Graece<\/em> appeared in 1993. The same Greek text appears in another popular volume published by the United Bible Societies, called the <em>Greek New Testament<\/em> (fourth edition). Aland has argued that the Nestle-Aland text, 27th edition (NA<span>27<\/span>), comes closer to the original text of the NT than did Tischendorf or Westcott and Hort. And in several writings he intimates that NA<span>27<\/span> may very well be the original text. Though few, if any, scholars would agree with this, the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland text is regarded by many as representing the latest and best in textual scholarship.<\/p>\n<h5>New Testament Textual Criticism<\/h5>\n<p>Textual critics working with ancient literature universally acknowledge the supremacy of earlier manuscripts over later ones. Textual critics not working with the NT would love to have the same kind of early witnesses that biblical scholars possess. In fact, many of them work with manuscripts written 1,000 years after the autographs were composed! We all marvel that the Dead Sea Scrolls have provided a text that is nearly 800 years closer to the originals than the Masoretic manuscripts, and yet many of the Dead Sea manuscripts are still over 600 to 800 years removed from the time of original composition. NT textual critics have a great advantage!<\/p>\n<p>The 19th-century NT textual scholars—such as Lachmann, Tregelles, Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort—worked on the basis that the earliest witnesses are the best witnesses. Some textual scholars have continued this line of recovery using the testimony of the earlier witnesses. But many textual scholars since the time of Westcott and Hort have been less inclined to produce editions based on the theory that the earliest reading is the best. Most present-day textual critics are more inclined to endorse the maxim: the reading that is most likely original is the one that best explains the variants.<\/p>\n<p>This maxim (or “canon” as it is sometimes called), as good as it is, produces conflicting results. For example, two scholars, using this same principle to examine the same variant unit, will not agree. One will argue that one variant was produced by a copyist attempting to emulate the author’s style; the other will claim the same variant has to be original because it accords with the author’s style. One will argue that one variant was produced by an orthodox scribe attempting to rid the text of a reading that could be used to promote heterodoxy or heresy; another will claim that the same variant has to be original because it is orthodox and accords with Christian doctrine (thus a heterodox or heretical scribe must have changed it). Furthermore, this principle allows for the possibility that the reading selected for the text can be taken from any manuscript of any date. This can lead to subjective eclecticism.<\/p>\n<p>Modern textual scholars have attempted to temper the subjectivism by employing a method called “reasoned eclecticism.” This kind of eclecticism applies a combination of internal and external considerations, whereby the character of the variants is evaluated in light of the manuscripts’ evidence and vice versa. This is supposed to produce a balanced view and serve as a check against purely subjective tendencies.<\/p>\n<p>The Alands favor the same kind of approach, calling it the local-genealogical method, which is defined as follows:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>It is impossible to proceed from the assumption of a manuscript stemma, and on the basis of a full review and analysis of the relationships obtaining among the variety of interrelated branches in the manuscript tradition, to undertake a recension of the data as one would do with other Greek texts. Decisions must be made one by one, instance by instance. This method has been characterized as eclecticism, but wrongly so. After carefully establishing the variety of readings offered in a passage and the possibilities of their interpretation, it must always then be determined afresh on the basis of external and internal criteria which of these readings (and frequently they are quite numerous) is the original, from which the others may be regarded as derivative. From the perspective of our present knowledge, this “local-genealogical” method (if it must be given a name) is the only one which meets the requirements of the NT textual tradition. (Introduction to <em>Novum Testamentum Graece,<\/em> 26th edition)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The “local-genealogical” method assumes that for any given variation unit any manuscript (or manuscripts) may have preserved the original text. Applying this method produces an extremely uneven documentary presentation of the text. Anyone studying the critical apparatus of NA<span>27<\/span> will detect that there is not an even documentary presentation. The eclecticism is dispersed throughout the text.<\/p>\n<p>“Reasoned eclecticism” and\/or the “local-genealogical” method tend to give priority to internal evidence over external evidence. But it has to be the other way around if we are going to recover the original text. This was Westcott and Hort’s opinion. With respect to their compilation of <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> Hort wrote, “Documentary evidence has been in most cases allowed to confer the place of honour against internal evidence” (<em>The Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> p 17).<\/p>\n<p>In this respect, Westcott and Hort need to be revived. Earnest Colwell was of the same mind when he wrote “Hort Redivivus: A Plea and a Program.” Colwell decried the growing tendency to rely entirely on the internal evidence of readings, without serious consideration of documentary evidence. He called upon scholars to make an attempt to reconstruct a history of the manuscript tradition. The abundance of manuscripts—several of which are very early—will aid scholars in this ongoing task.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, M<span>anuscripts and Text of the (New Testament)<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all copies of any work of literature were made by hand (hence, the name “manuscript”). According to a current tabulation, there are 99 papyrus manuscripts, 257 uncial manuscripts, and 2,795 minuscule manuscripts. We can add 2,209 Greek lectionaries to this list. Therefore, we have over 5,350 manuscript copies of the Greek NT or portions thereof. No other work of Greek literature can boast of such numbers.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantPapyrusManuscripts\">Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>Papyrus is a tall, aquatic reed, the pith of which is cut into strips, laid in a crosswork pattern and glued together to make a page for writing. The papyrus rolls of Egypt have been used as a writing surface since the early third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. The Greeks adopted papyrus around 900 <span>BC<\/span>, and later the Romans adopted its use. However, the oldest extant Greek rolls of papyrus date from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>. Unfortunately, papyrus is perishable, requiring a dry climate for its preservation. That is why so many papyri have been discovered in the desert sands of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The NT papyrus manuscripts (abbreviated as “P”) are generally the earliest manuscripts of the NT. Broadly speaking, the most important ones can be categorized in three groups: the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (from Oxyrhynchus, Egypt), (2) the Beatty Papyri (named after the owner); and (3) the Bodmer Papyri (named after the owner).<\/p>\n<h5>The Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>Beginning in 1898 B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt discovered thousands of papyrus fragments in the ancient rubbish heaps of Oxyrhynchus, Egypt. This site yielded volumes of papyrus fragments containing all sorts of written material (literature, business and legal contracts, letters, etc.) as well as over 40 manuscripts containing portions of the NT. Some of the more noteworthy papyrus manuscripts from Oxyrhynchus are as follows:<\/p>\n<h6>P1 (P. Oxy. 2)<\/h6>\n<p>This late second-century manuscript contains Matthew 1:1-9, 12, 14-20. Grenfell and Hunt in the winter of 1896–97 went to Oxyrhynchus (now called El Bahnasa) in search of ancient Christian documents. P1 was discovered on the second day of the dig. At the time of this discovery, this was the earliest extant copy of any NT portion—at least 100 years earlier than Codex Vaticanus. The copyist of P1 seems to have faithfully followed a very reliable exemplar. Where there are major variants, P1 agrees with the best Alexandrian witnesses, especially B (Codex Vaticanus), from which it rarely varies.<\/p>\n<h6>P5 (P. Oxy. 208 and 1781)<\/h6>\n<p>Two separate portions of this third-century manuscript were unearthed from Oxyrhynchus by Grenfell and Hunt, both from the same papyrus manuscript. The first portion contains John 1:23-31, 33-40 on one fragment and John 20:11-17 on another—probably on the first and last quires of a manuscript containing only the Gospel of John. This portion was published in volume II of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/em> in 1899; the second portion—containing John 16:14-30—was not published until 1922 in volume XV of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>After examining the first portion, Grenfell and Hunt said, “The text is a good one, and appears to have affinities with that of Codex Sinaiticus, with which the papyrus agrees in several readings not found elsewhere.” The papyrus, written in a documentary hand, is marked for its brevity.<\/p>\n<h6>P13 (P. Oxy. 657 and PSI 1292)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated between 175 and 225, contains 12 columns from a roll preserving the text of Hebrews 2:14–5:5; 10:8-22; 10:29–11:13; 11:28–12:7. The text of Hebrews was written in a reformed documentary hand on the back of the papyrus containing the new epitome of Livy. For this reason, some scholars think the manuscript was possibly brought to Egpyt by a Roman official and left behind when he left his post. P13 very often agrees with B, and it supplements B where it is lacking—namely, from Hebrews 9:14 to the end of Hebrews. P13 and P46 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P77 (P. Oxy. 2683 + 4405)<\/h6>\n<p>Dated c. 150–75, this is the earliest manuscript of Matthew (23:30-39). The manuscript is clearly a literary production. It was written in an elegant hand and has what was or became a standard system of chapter division, as well as punctuation and breathing marks. P77 has close textual affinities with Codex Sinaiticus.<\/p>\n<h6>P90 (P. Oxy. 3523)<\/h6>\n<p>This second-century manuscript (c. 150–75) contains John 18:36–19:7. The handwriting (an upright, rounded, elegant script) is much like that found in P66. Furthermore, P90 has more affinity with P66 than with any other single manuscript, though it does not concur with P66 in its entirety.<\/p>\n\n<h6>P. Oxy. 4404<\/h6>\n<p>Containing Matthew 21:34-37, 43, 45, this manuscript could be the earliest extant manuscript of the NT in that the script is early Roman and therefore could be dated to the early second century.<\/p>\n<h5>The Chester Beatty Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased from a dealer in Egypt during the 1930s by Chester Beatty and by the University of Michigan. The three manuscripts in this collection are very early and contain a large portion of the NT text. P45 (c. 200) contains portions of all four Gospels and Acts; P46 (c. 125) has almost all of Paul’s epistles and Hebrews; and P47 (third century) contains Revelation 9–17.<\/p>\n<h6>P45 (Chester Beatty Papyrus I)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has the four Gospels and Acts (Mt 20:24-32; 21:13-19; 25:41–26:39; Mk 4:36–9:31; 11:27–12:28; Lk 6:31–7:7; 9:26–14:33; Jn 4:51–5:2, 21-25; 10:7-25; 10:30–11:10, 18-36, 42-57; Acts 4:27–17:17). The order of books in the original intact manuscript was probably as follows: Matthew, John, Luke, Mark, Acts (the so-called Western order). This manuscript was dated by Kenyon to the early third century, a date that was confirmed by the papyrologists W. Schubart and H. I. Bell. This continues to be the date assigned to this manuscript in modern handbooks on textual criticism and critical editions of the Greek NT, but the consistent formation of certain letters suggests an earlier date—maybe sometime in the late second century.<\/p>\n<p>The scribe of P45 worked without any intention of exactly reproducing his source. He wrote with a great amount of freedom—harmonizing, smoothing out, substituting at will. In short, the scribe did not actually copy words. He saw through the language to its idea-content, and copied that in words of his own choosing, or in rearranged order. Thus, in the scribe of P45 we see an exegete and a paraphraser.<\/p>\n<h6>P46 (Chester Beatty Papyrus II)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has most of Paul’s epistles (excluding the Pastorals) in this order: Romans 5:17–6:14; 8:15–15:9; 15:11–16:27; Hebrews 1:1–13:25; 1 Corinthians 1:1–16:22; 2 Corinthians 1:1–13:13; Ephesians 1:1–6:24; Galatians 1:1–6:18; Philippians 1:1–4:23; Colossians 1:1–4:18; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 1:9–2:3; 5:5-9, 23-28 (with minor lacunae in each of the books).<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript was originally dated to the early third century. But others, since, have dated the manuscript earlier in the second century. The scribe who produced this manuscript used an early, excellent exemplar. He was a professional scribe because there are stichoi notations at the end of several books (see the conclusion of Romans, 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians). The stichoi were used by professionals to note how many lines had been copied for commensurate pay. Most likely, the ex officio of the scriptorium (perhaps connected with a church library) paginated the codex and indicated the stichoi. The scribe himself made a few corrections as he went, and then several other readers made corrections here and there.<\/p>\n<p>The text of P46 shows a strong affinity with B (especially in Ephesians, Colossians, and Hebrews) and next with א (Codex Sinaiticus). P46 agrees much less with the later representatives of the Alexandrian text. In short, P46 is proto-Alexandrian. In Hebrews, P46 and P13 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P47 (Chester Beatty Papyrus III)<\/h6>\n<p>This third-century codex contains Revelation 9:10–17:2. The text of P47 agrees more often with that of Codex Sinaiticus than with any other manuscript (including Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus), though it often shows independence.<\/p>\n<h5>The Bodmer Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased by M. Martin Bodmer from a dealer in Egypt during the 1950s and 1960s. The three important papyri in this collection are P66 (c. 175, containing almost all of John), P72 (third century, having all of 1 and 2 Peter and Jude), and P75 (c. 200, containing large parts of Luke 3—John 15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h4\" id=\"P66\">P66 (Papyrus Bodmer II)<\/p>\n<p>This manuscript contains most of John’s Gospel (1:1–6:11; 6:35–14:26, 29-30; 15:2-26; 16:2-4, 6-7; 16:10–20:20, 22-23; 20:25–21:9). The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11), making it the earliest witness to not include this spurious passage. The manuscript is usually dated as c. 200, but the renowned paleographer Herbert Hunger has argued that P66 should be dated to the first half, if not the first quarter, of the second century.<\/p>\n<p>According to recent studies, it seems evident that P66 has preserved the work of three individuals: the original scribe, a thoroughgoing corrector, and a minor corrector. With a practiced calligraphic hand, the original scribe of P66 wrote in larger print as he went along in order to fill out the codex. The large print throughout indicates that it was written to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The text exhibits the scribe’s knowledge of other portions of Scripture (inasmuch as he harmonized John 6:69 to Matthew 16:16 and John 21:6 to Luke 5:5), his use of standard <em>nomina sacra<\/em> (a way of writing divine names), and his special use of <em>nomina sacra<\/em> for the words “cross” and “crucify.”<\/p>\n<p>The original scribe was quite free in his interaction with the text; he produced several singular readings that reveal his independent interpretation of the text. While the numerous scribal mistakes would seem to indicate that the scribe was inattentive, many of the singular readings—prior to correction—reveal that he was not detached from the narrative of the text. Rather, he became so absorbed in his reading that he often forgot the exact words he was copying. His task as a copyist was to duplicate the exemplar word for word, but this was frustrated by the fact that he was reading the text in logical semantic chunks and often became a coproducer of a new text. As a result, he continually had to stop his reading and make many in-process corrections. But he left several places uncorrected, which were later fixed by the <em>diorthotes<\/em> (official corrector). The finished product is quite good, presenting a text that is very close to the Alexandrian witnesses.<\/p>\n<h6>P72 (Papyrus Bodmer VII–VIII)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated late third century, has an interesting collection of writings in one codex: 1 Peter 1:1–5:14; 2 Peter 1:1–3:18; Jude 1:1-25; the Nativity of Mary, the apocryphal correspondence of Paul to the Corinthians, the eleventh ode of Solomon, Melito’s Homily on the Passover, a fragment of a hymn, the Apology of Phileas, and Psalms 33 and 34.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars think that four scribes took part in producing the entire manuscript. First Peter has clear Alexandrian affinities—especially with B. Second Peter and (especially) Jude display more of an uncontrolled type text (usually associated with the “Western” text), with several independent readings.<\/p>\n<h6>P75 (Papyrus Bodmer XIV–XV)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex contains most of Luke and John (Lk 3:18–4:2; 4:34–5:10; 5:37–18:18; 22:4–24:53; Jn 1:1–11:45, 48-57; 12:3–13:1, 8-9; 14:8-30; 15:7-8.) The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11). The manuscript can be dated to the late second or early third century.<\/p>\n<p>The copyist of P75 was a literate scribe trained in making books. His craftsmanship shows through in his tight calligraphy and controlled copying. The handwriting displayed in this manuscript is typically called by paleographers the common angular type of the late second to early third century. The scribe’s Christianity shows in his abbreviations of the <em>nomina sacra<\/em><em>,<\/em> as well as in his abbreviation of the word “cross.” These are telltale signs of a scribe who belonged to the Christian community. Furthermore, the large typeface indicates that the manuscript was composed to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The scribe even added a system of sectional divisions to aid any would-be lector. Thus, we have a manuscript written by a Christian for other Christians.<\/p>\n<p>There are several indications of the scribe’s Alexandrian orientation. First and foremost is his scriptoral acumen. He is the best of all the early Christian scribes, and his manuscript is an extremely accurate copy. P75 is the work of an extremely disciplined scribe who copied with the intention of being careful and accurate. Scholars generally agree that P75 displays the kind of text that was used in making Codex Vaticanus (there is 87 percent agreement between P75 and B). As such, textual scholars have a high regard for P75’s textual fidelity.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Other Papyrus Manuscripts<\/h5>\n<h6>P4 + P64 + P67<\/h6>\n<p>These three papyrus manuscripts are part of one codex dated <span>AD<\/span> 150–175. The manuscript was the work of a professional scribe, and the text is extremely accurate.<\/p>\n<h6>P32 (Rylands Papyrus 5)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, preserving Titus 1:11-15; 2:3-8, is dated c. 175, making it the earliest extant copy of any of the Pastoral Epistles. P32 shows agreement with א and with F and G. Since F and G (nearly identical manuscripts) go back to the same archetype, it is possible that P32 could be linked to the same source.<\/p>\n<h6>P52 (Rylands Papyrus 457)<\/h6>\n<p>This fragment, containing John 18:31-34, 37-38, is noteworthy because of its date: c. 110–125. Many scholars (F. Kenyon, H. I. Bell, A. Deissmann, and W. H. P. Hatch) have confirmed this dating. The manuscript came from the Fayum or Oxyrhynchus site. It was acquired in 1920 by Grenfell, but it remained unnoticed among hundreds of papyri until 1934, when C. H. Roberts recognized that this fragment preserves a few verses from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantUncialManuscripts\">Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>The manuscripts typically classified as “uncial” are so designated to differentiate them from papyrus manuscripts. In a sense, this is a misnomer because the real difference has to do with the material they are written on—vellum (treated animal hide) as compared to papyrus—not the kind of letters used. Indeed, the papyri are also written in uncials (capital letters), but the term “uncial” typically describes the majuscule lettering that was prominent in fourth-century biblical texts, such as in א, A, B, C.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Sinaiticus (or א)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex contains the entire OT and the NT in this order: the four Gospels, the Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews), Acts, the General Epistles, Revelation. It also includes the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. The codex cannot be earlier than 340 (the year Eusebius died) because the Eusebian sections of the text are indicated in the margins of the Gospels by a contemporary hand. Most scholars date it 350–375.<\/p>\n<p>This codex was discovered by Constantin von Tischendorf in St Catherine’s Monastery (situated at the foot of Mt Sinai). On a visit to the monastery in 1844 he noticed in a wastebasket some parchment leaves that were being used to light the lamps. He was allowed to take this waste paper, which proved to be 43 leaves from various parts of the Greek translation of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>In 1853 he made a second trip to the monastery and found nothing. In 1859, however, on his third trip, he found not only other parts of the OT but also the complete NT. He was finally able to persuade the monastery authorities to present the manuscript to the czar, the great patron of the Greek Catholic Church, who placed it in the Imperial Library in St Petersburg. The czar gave great honors to the monastery and its authorities, and everybody seemed well pleased. Later Tischendorf was charged with having stolen the manuscript from its lawful owners, but the better textual scholars do not accept that story.<\/p>\n\n<p>The manuscript remained in the Imperial Library until 1933, when it was purchased by the British Museum for the huge sum of £100,000 (about $500,000). Textual criticism made the headlines because one manuscript was bought for this much money, raised largely by public subscription during the Great Depression. The manuscript is now on display in the manuscript room of the museum, where it is considered one of its most prized possessions.<\/p>\n<p>The text of Sinaiticus is very closely related to that of Codex Vaticanus. They agree in presenting the purest type of text, usually called the Alexandrian text type. Tischendorf greatly used the textual evidence of Codex Sinaiticus in preparing his critical editions of the Greek NT. Tischendorf thought four scribes had originally produced the codex, whom he named scribes A, B, C, D. After reinvestigation, H. J. Milne and T. C. Skeat identified only three scribes: A (who wrote the historical and poetical books of the OT, as well as most of the NT), B (who wrote the Prophets and the Shepherd of Hermas), and D (who wrote some Psalms, Tobit, Judith, and 4 Maccabees, and redid small sections of the NT). Milne and Skeat demonstrated that scribe A of Codex Vaticanus was likely the same scribe as scribe D of Codex Sinaiticus. If this true, then א is contemporary with B—perhaps produced in the same scriptorium in Alexandria. Codex Sinaiticus provides a fairly reliable witness to the NT; however, the scribe was not as careful as the scribe of B.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Alexandrinus (A)<\/h5>\n<p>This is one of the three most important codices containing early copies of the whole Bible in Greek (the other two being the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus codexes). The name Alexandrinus comes from ancient records suggesting that it was copied in Egypt during the early part of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. The early history of this manuscript and its Egyptian provenance is partially revealed by its flyleaves. A note by Cyril of Lucar (patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople in the 1620s) states that, according to tradition, it was written by Thecla, a noble lady of Egypt shortly after the Council of Nicaea (325) and that her name was originally inscribed at the end of the volume but the last page was lost due to mutilation. An Arabic note of the 13th or 14th century also says that the manuscript was written by “Thecla the martyr.” Another Arabic note says that is was presented to the patriarchal cell of Alexandria (c. 1098). Cyril of Lucar took the manuscript from Alexandria to Constantinople in 1621 and then gave it to Charles I of England in 1627, where it became part of the Royal Library, then later the British Museum.<\/p>\n<p>Only 773 of the original 820 or so pages still exist. The rest were lost as the book was passed down through the centuries. The surviving parts of Alexandrinus contain a Greek translation of the whole OT, the Apocrypha (including four books of Maccabees and Psalm 151), most of the NT, and some early Christian writings (of which the First and Second Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians are the most important).<\/p>\n<p>Frederick Kenyon thought the codex was the work of five scribes, to each of whom he designated a Roman numeral. According to Kenyon, scribes I and II copied the OT; scribe III did Matthew, Mark, 1 Corinthians 10:8—Philemon 1:25; scribe IV did Luke—Acts, General Epistles, Romans 1:1—1 Corinthians 10:8; and scribe V did Revelation. Milne and Skeat, however, argued that the whole codex was the work of two copyists (I and II). W. H. P. Hatch noted that many corrections have been made in the manuscript, most of them at an early date. Some of these corrections were introduced by the scribe himself, and others came from later hands.<\/p>\n<p>Evidently, the scribes of this codex used exemplars of varying quality for various sections of the NT. The exemplar used for the Gospels was of poor quality, reflecting a Byzantine text type. Its testimony in the Epistles is much better, and in Revelation it provides the best witness to the original text.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Codex Vaticanus (B)<\/h5>\n<p>Codex Vaticanus is the Vatican Manuscript, so named because it is the most famous manuscript in the Vatican Library in Rome. This manuscript has been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1475, but it was not made available to scholars, such as Constantin von Tischendorf and Samuel Tregelles, until the middle of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>At one time, the codex contained the whole Greek Bible, including most of the books of the Apocrypha, but it has lost many of its leaves. Originally it must have had about 820 leaves (1,640 pp), but now it has 759—617 in the OT and 142 in the NT. The major gaps of the manuscript are Genesis 1:1–46:28; 2 Samuel 2:5-7, 10-13; Psalms 106:27–138:6; Hebrews 9:14–13:25; the Pastoral Epistles; and Revelation. Each leaf measures ten and a half by ten inches (26.7 by 25.4 centimeters). Each page has three columns (two for the poetical books) with 40 to 44 lines to the column. The manuscript was written by two different scribes. It is dated in the early to middle part of the fourth century. It is not known where the manuscript originated, but it has been in the Vatican Library from the time of its earliest catalog in 1475.<\/p>\n\n<p>When Napoleon conquered Rome, he brought its treasures to Paris, including this manuscript. The scholar Hug identified it and called the attention of other scholars to it. After the downfall of Napoleon, the manuscript was returned to the Vatican Library. Competent textual scholars were not allowed to do careful work on it until a photographic edition was published in 1890. It is now on exhibit in the Vatican Library.<\/p>\n<p>The text of the Vatican Manuscript is much like that of Codex Sinaiticus. These are generally recognized as the two finest examples of the Alexandrian type of Greek text of the NT. The Greek text of the OT is very fine too, but it is not quite so important, as the original language of the OT was Hebrew. Virtually all the textual scholars since the days of Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort (who brought out their Greek Testament, including their theory of textual criticism, in 1881), recognize this neutral type of text as a very early text and a very pure text, an extremely accurate reproduction of what the original text must have been. Westcott and Hort called it a second-century text accurate in 999 out of 1,000 words so far as any matter of translatable difference was concerned. א and B are the finest examples of this type of text, but it is also found in a few other Greek uncial manuscripts, a few of the early translations, and in the writings of a few of the early church fathers. Since the days of Westcott and Hort, their theory has been confirmed by the discovery of some papyrus manuscripts, notably the Bodmer Papyri, discovered in the 1950s.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex is a palimpsest (the original writing was erased and different words written on the same material). It originally contained the entire Bible but now has only parts of six OT books and portions of all NT books except 2 Thessalonians and 2 John. The single-column Bible text, written in the 5th century <span>AD<\/span>, was erased in the 12th century and replaced by a two-column text of a Greek translation of sermons or treatises by a certain Ephraem, a 4th-century Syrian church leader. Such a practice was common in periods of economic depression or when parchment was scarce. The original writing was scraped from the writing surface and the surface smoothed. Then new compositions could be written on the prepared surface. Using chemicals Tischendorf was able to read much of the erased document.<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript may have been brought from the east to Florence by a learned Greek named Andrew John Lascar in the time of Lorenzo de’Medici. Since Lascar was known as Rhyndacenus (from the river Rhyndacus), he probably came from the region of Phrygia (site of ancient Laodicea). Where the manuscript was prior to this is not known. The Ephraemi manuscript was brought to Italy in the early sixth century, where it became the property of the Medici family. Catherine de’Medici took it to France, where it remains today.<\/p>\n<p>The text of this manuscript is mixed—it is compounded from all the major text types, agreeing frequently with the later koine of Byzantine type, which most scholars regard as the least valuable type of NT text.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Bezae (D)<\/h5>\n<p>This is a Greek-Latin diglot containing Matthew—Acts, 3 John, with lacunae. Most scholars date it late fourth or early fifth century (c. 400). Some scholars think the codex was produced in either Egypt or North Africa by a scribe whose mother tongue was Latin. Another scholar (D. C. Parker) has argued that it was copied in Beirut, a center of Latin legal studies during the fifth century, where both Latin and Greek were used. Evidently, it was produced by a scribe who knew Latin better than Greek, and then was corrected by several scribes. In any event, the codex somehow came into the hands of Theodore Beza, French scholar and successor to Calvin. Beza gave it to the Cambridge University Library in 1581.<\/p>\n<p>This codex is probably the most controversial of the NT uncials because of its marked independence. Its many additions, omissions, and alterations (especially in Luke and Acts) are the work of a significant theologian. A few earlier manuscripts (P29, P38, P48, and 0171) appear to be precursors to the type of text found in D, which is considered the principal witness of the Western text-type. Thus, Codex Bezae could be a copy of an earlier revised edition. This reviser must have been a scholar who had a propensity for adding historical, biographical, and geographical details. More than anything, he was intent on filling in gaps in the narrative by adding circumstantial details.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Washingtonianus, or The Freer Gospels (W)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex, dated around 400, has the four Gospels and Acts. It is often referred to as the Freer Gospels—named after its owner, Charles Freer. The codex likely came from the ruins of a monastery near Giza. The handwriting is quite similar to that found in a fifth-century fragment of the book of Enoch found at Akhmim in 1886.<\/p>\n<p>Codex W was copied from a parent manuscript (exemplar) that had been pieced together from several different manuscripts. This is obvious because the textual presentation of W is noticeably variegated and even the stratification of the text is matched by similar variations in paragraphing. The scribe who collated the parent manuscript drew upon various sources to put together his Gospel codex. It is likely that the scribe of the parent manuscript used a text that came from North Africa (the “Western” text) for the first part of Mark, and the scribe of W used manuscripts from Antioch for Matthew and the second part of Luke to fill the gaps in the more ancient manuscript he was copying. Detailed textual analysis reveals the variegated textual stratifications of W, as follows: in Matthew the text is Byzantine; in Mark the text is first Western (1:1–5:30), then Caesarean in Mark 5:31–16:20 (akin to P45); in Luke the text is first Alexandrian (1:1–8:12), then Byzantine. John is more complicated because the first part of John (1:1–5:11), which fills a quire, was the work of a seventh-century scribe who must have replaced a damaged quire. (W<span>s<\/span> designates the work of this scribe.) This first section has a mixture of Alexandrian and Western readings, as does the rest of John.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex 1739<\/h5>\n<p>This tenth-century codex has Acts and the Epistles. The manuscript was discovered at Mt Athos in 1879 by E. von der Goltz. The manuscript has strong textual affinities with P46, B, 1739, Coptic Sahidic, Coptic Boharic, Clement, and Origen. The relationship between P46, B, and 1739 is remarkable because 1739 is a tenth-century manuscript that was copied from a fourth-century manuscript of excellent quality. According to a colophon, the scribe of 1739 for the Pauline Epistles followed a manuscript that came from Caesarea in the library of Pamphilus and that contained an Origenian text. The three manuscripts, P46, B, and 1739, form a clear textual line: from P46 (early second century) to B (early fourth century) to 1739 (tenth century based on fourth century).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTextoftheNewTestament\">The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The original text of the NT is the “published” text—that is, the text as it was in its final edited form and released for circulation in the Christian community. For some books of the NT, there is little difference between the original composition and the published text. After the author wrote or dictated his work, he (or an associate) made the final editorial corrections and then released it for distribution. As is the case for books published in modern times, so in ancient times, the original writing of the author is not always the same as what is published—due to the editorial process. Nonetheless, the author is credited with the final edited text, and the published book is attributed to the author and considered the autograph. This autograph is the original published text. Of course, in this case the autographs do not exist, so scholars have to rely on copies to recover or reconstruct the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars think it is impossible to recover the original text of the Greek NT because they have not been able to reconstruct the early history of textual transmission. Other modern scholars are less pessimistic but still quite guarded in affirming the possiblity. And yet others are optimistic because we possess many early manuscripts of excellent quality and because our view of the early period of textual transmission has been getting clearer and clearer.<\/p>\n<p>When we speak of recovering the text of the NT, we are referring to individual books of the NT, not to the entire volume per se, because each book (or group of books—such as the Pauline Epistles) had its own unique history of textual transmission. The earliest extant copy of an entire NT text is the one preserved in Codex Sinaiticus (written about <span>AD<\/span> 375). (Codex Vaticanus lacks the Pastoral Epistles and Revelation.) Prior to the fourth century, the NT was circulated in its various parts: as a single book or a group of books (such as the four Gospels or the Pauline Epistles). Manuscripts from the late first century to the third century have been found with individual books such as Matthew (P1, P77), Mark (P88), Luke (P69), John (P5, 22, 52, 66), Acts (P91), Revelation (P18, 47), or containing groups of books, such as the four Gospels with Acts (P45), the Pauline Epistles (P30, P46, P92), the Petrine Epistles and Jude (P72). Each of the books of the NT has had its own textual history and has been preserved with varying degrees of accuracy. Nonetheless, all of the books were altered from the original state due to the process of manual copying decade after decade and century after century. And the text of each of the books needs to be recovered.<\/p>\n<p>The NT text was affected with many variations in its early history. In the late first and early second century, the oral traditions and the written word existed side by side with equal status—especially with respect to the material of the Gospels. Often, the text was changed by scribes attempting to conform the written message to the oral tradition or attempting to conform one Gospel account to another. By the end of the second century and into the third century, many of the significant variant readings entered into the textual stream.<\/p>\n<p>The early period of textual transmission, however, was not completely marred by textual infidelity and scribal liberty. There were those scribes who copied the text faithfully and reverently—that is, they recognized that they were copying a sacred text written by an apostle. The formalization of canonization did not ascribe this sacredness to the text. Canonization came about as the result of common, historical recognition of the sacredness of various NT books. Certain NT books, such as the four Gospels, Acts, and Paul’s epistles were considered inspired literature from the onset. As such, certain scribes copied them with reverential fidelity.<\/p>\n<p>Other scribes, however, felt free to make “improvements” in the text—either in the interest of doctrine and harmonization or due to the influence of a competitive oral tradition. The manuscripts produced in such a manner created a kind of “popular text”—i.e., an uncontrolled text. (This text type used to be called the “Western text,” but scholars now recognize this as a misnomer.)<\/p>\n<p>During the second century, there were a few men who produced recensions of the NT text. According to Eusebius, Theodotus (and his followers) altered the text for their own purposes. In the middle of the second century, Marcion expunged his copies of the Gospel according to Luke of all references to the Jewish background of Jesus, and Tatian’s harmony of the Gospels contains several textual alterations that gave support to ascetic views. And yet another recendor created the D-type text for the Gospels and Acts. This theologically minded redactor, living in the late second or third century, created a text that had short-lived popularity. Three third-century papyri, P29, P38, P48, each containing a portion from the book of Acts, may be precursors to the D-type text in Acts. But there are other papyri containing portions of Acts that provide even earlier testimony to a purer form of Acts—namely, P45 (c. 150) and P91 (c. 200), thereby showing that the D-type text of Acts did not necessarily antedate the purer form.<\/p>\n<p>Besides these endeavors—which are all noted for creating textual impurities—there was no recension of the NT text in the second century. Rather, it was a period in which there were scribes who exercised freedom in copying and those who demonstrated acumen. The manuscripts produced by the latter are those that come closest to preserving the original text. A prime example of an accurate late-second-century manuscript is P75.<\/p>\n<p>It is a well-known fact that the text produced by the scribe of P75 is a very accurate manuscript. It is also well-known that P75 was the kind of manuscript used in formulating Codex Vaticanus—the readings of P75 and B are remarkably similar. Prior to the discovery of P75, certain scholars thought Codex Vaticanus was the work of a fourth-century recension; others (chiefly Hort) thought it must trace back to a very early and accurate copy. Hort said that Codex Vaticanus preserves “not only a very ancient text, but a very pure line of a very ancient text” (Westcott and Hort, <em>The<\/em> <em>Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> pp 250–51). P75 appears to have shown that Hort was right.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the discovery of P75, many textual scholars were convinced that the second- and third-century papyri displayed a text in flux, a text characterized only by individual independence. The Chester Beatty Papyrus, P45, and the Bodmer Papyri, P66 and P72 (in 2 Peter and Jude), show this kind of independence. Scholars thought that scribes at Alexandria must have used several such texts to produce a good recension—as is exhibited in Codex Vaticanus. But we now know that Codex Vaticanus was not the result of a scholarly recension, resulting from editorial selection across the various textual histories. Rather, it is now quite clear that Codex Vaticanus was simply a copy (with some modifications) of a manuscript much like P75, not a fourth-century recension.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars may point out that this does not automatically mean that P75 and B represent the original text. What it does mean, they say, is that we have a second-century manuscript showing great affinity with a fourth-century manuscript whose quality has been highly esteemed. But various scholars have demonstrated that there was no Alexandrian recension before the time of P75 (late second century) and B (early fourth) and that both these manuscripts represent a relatively pure form of preservation of a relatively pure line of descent from the original text.<\/p>\n<p>The current view about the early text is that certain scribes in Alexandria and\/or scribes familiar with Alexandrian scriptoral practices (perhaps those in Oxyrhynchus) were probably responsible for maintaining a relatively pure text throughout the second, third, and fourth centuries. The Alexandrian scribes, associated with or actually employed by the scriptorium of the great Alexandrian library and\/or members of the scriptorium associated with the catechetical school at Alexandria (called the <em>Didaskelion<\/em>), were trained philologists, grammarians, and textual critics. Their work on the NT was not recensional—that is, it was not an organized emendation of the text. Rather, the work of purification and preservation was probably done here and there by various individuals trained in text criticism. This is apparent in the production of P66, which contains the Gospel of John. This manuscript was probably produced in an Egyptian scriptorium by a novice scribe who made many blunders, which were subsequently corrected by another scribe working in the same scriptorium. The first text produced by the novice could be classified as being very “free,” but the corrected text is far more accurate. (See the discussion on this manuscript above.)<\/p>\n<p>What appears to have happened with the copying of the NT text in the early period in Egypt has been poignantly characterized by Zuntz. He said that when a book was immensely popular (such as Homer’s <em>Iliad<\/em> and <em>Odyssey,<\/em> or Plato’s writings), it was copied with wild enthusiasm by novice and scholar alike. But when grammarians and scribes got ahold of it, they tried to rid it of textual corruption. In the process, however, they may have obliterated some authentic readings, but not many. Thus, the popular text (also known as the “Western text”) could have preserved the original wording in some cases. The popular or free kind of text is displayed in several third-century manuscripts: P9, P37, P40, P45, P72, and P78.<\/p>\n<p>In brief, this popular text is usually displayed in any kind of manuscript that was not produced by Alexandrian influences. This text, given to independence, is not as trustworthy as the Alexandrian text type. But because the Alexandrian text is known as a polished text, the popular text sometimes preserved the original wording. When a variant reading has the support of “Western” and Alexandrian texts, it is very likely original; but when the two are divided, the Alexandrian witnesses more often preserve the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>One dilemma still remains for some textual critics. They cannot explain how a P75\/B-type text coexisted with a Western-type text in the second century. All that can be said is that the Western text generally appears to be inferior to the P75\/B-type text. Of course, this kind of judgment troubles certain scholars, who point out that the esteem given to B and P75 is based on a subjective appreciation of the kind of text they contain (as over against the Western text) rather than on any kind of theoretical reconstruction of the early transmission of the text. This same subjective estimation was at work when Westcott and Hort decided that B was intrinsically superior to D (see their <em>Introduction,<\/em> pp 32–42). Yet the praxis of textual criticism time and again demonstrates that the P75\/B-type text is intrinsically superior to the Western text.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, the manuscripts that represent a pure preservation of the original text are usually those called “Alexandrian.” Some scholars, such as Bruce Metzger, have called the earlier manuscripts “protoAlexandrian,” for they (or manuscripts like them) are thought of as being used to compose an Alexandrian-type text. However, this is looking at things from the perspective of the fourth century. We should look at things from the second century onward and then compare fourth-century manuscripts to those of the second. The second-century manuscripts could still be called “Alexandrian” in the sense that they were produced under Alexandrian influences. Perhaps a distinguishing terminology could be “early Alexandrian” (pre-Constantine) and “later Alexandrian” (post-Constantine). Manuscripts designated as “early Alexandrian” would generally be purer, less editorialized. Manuscripts designated “later Alexandrian” would display editorialization, as well as the influence of other textual traditions.<\/p>\n<p>The “early Alexandrian” text is reflected in many second- and third-century manuscripts. On the top of the list is P75 (c. 175), the work of a competent and careful scribe. Not far behind in quality is P4+P64+P67 (c. 150), the work of an excellent copyist. Other extremely good copies are P1 (c. 200), P20 (early third century), P23 (c. 200), P27 (third century), P28 (third century), P32 (c. 150), P39 (third century), P46 (c. 125), P65 (third century), P66 (in its corrected form—P66<span>c<\/span>; c. 150), P70 (third century), P77 (c. 150), P87 (c. 125), P90 (c. 175), and P91 (c. 200). Several of these manuscripts have been placed in the “strict” category by textual critics Kurt and Barbara Aland—that is, they exhibit “strict” scribal control and therefore are accurate copies of an exemplar, if not the original. These manuscripts are P1, P23, P35, P37, P39, P64\/67, P65, P70, and P75.<\/p>\n<p>The “later Alexandrian” text, which displays editorial polishing, is exhibited in a few manuscripts, such as א (fourth century), T (fifth century), ע (seventh century), L (eighth century), 33 (ninth century), 1739 (a tenth-century manuscript copied from a fourth-century Alexandrian manuscript much like P46), and 579 (13th century). Beginning in the fifth century, Byzantine-type manuscripts began to make their influence in Egypt. Some manuscripts dated around 400 that came from Egypt clearly reflect this influence; Codex Alexandrinus (A) is probably the best example. Other Egyptian manuscripts of this era, such as Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Codex Washingtonianus (W) display large-scale harmonization, which cannot be directly linked to any kind of recension.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the third century, another kind of Greek text came into being and then grew in popularity until it became the dominant text-type throughout Christendom. This is the text-type first instigated by Lucian of Antioch, according to Jerome (in his introduction to his Latin translation of the Gospels). Lucian’s text was a definite recension (i.e., a purposely created edition)—as opposed to the Alexandrian text-type that came about as the result of a process wherein the Alexandrian scribes, upon comparing many manuscripts, attempted to preserve the best text—thereby serving more as textual critics than editors. Of course, the Alexandrians did do some editing—such as we would call copy-editing. The Lucianic text is the outgrowth and culmination of the popular text; it is characterized by smoothness of language, which is achieved by the removal of obscurities and awkward grammatical constructions and by the conflation of variant readings. Lucian (and\/or his associates) must have used many different kinds of manuscripts of varying qualities to produce a harmonized, edited NT text. The kind of editorial work that went into the Lucianic text is what we would call substantive editing.<\/p>\n<p>Lucian’s text was produced prior to the Diocletian persecution (c. 303), during which time many copies of the NT were confiscated and destroyed. Not long after this period of devastation, Constantine came to power and then recognized Christianity as the state religion. There was, of course, a great need for copies of the NT to be made and distributed to churches throughout the Mediterranean world. It was at this time that Lucian’s text began to be propagated by bishops going out from the Antiochan school to churches throughout the East, taking the text with them. Lucian’s text soon became the standard text of the Eastern church and formed the basis for the Byzantine text—and is thus the ultimate authority for the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>While Lucian was forming his recension of the NT text, the Alexandrian text was taking on its final shape. As was mentioned earlier, the formation of the Alexandrian text-type was the result of a process (as opposed to a single editorial recension). The formation of the Alexandrian text involved minor textual criticism (i.e., selecting variant readings among various manuscripts) and copyediting (i.e., producing a readable text). There was far less tampering with the text in the Alexandrian text-type than in the Lucian, and the underlying manuscripts for the Alexandrian text-type were superior to those used by Lucian. Perhaps Hesychius was responsible for giving the Alexandrian text its final shape, and Athanasius of Alexandria may have been the one who made this text the archetypal text for Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>As the years went by, there were fewer and fewer Alexandrian manuscripts produced, and more and more Byzantine manuscripts manufactured. Very few Egyptians continued to read Greek (with the exception of those in St Catherine’s Monastery, the site of the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus), and the rest of the Mediterranean world turned to Latin. It was only those in the Greek-speaking churches in Greece and Byzantium that continued to make copies of the Greek text. For century after century—from the 6th to the 14th—the great majority of NT manuscripts were produced in Byzantium, all bearing the same kind of text. When the first Greek NT was printed (c. 1525), it was based on a Greek text that Erasmus had compiled, using a few late Byzantine manuscripts. This printed text, with minor revisions, became the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>Beginning in the 17th century, earlier manuscripts began to be discovered—manuscripts with a text that differed from that found in the Textus Receptus. Around 1630, Codex Alexandrinus was brought to England. An early fifth-century manuscript, containing the entire NT, it provided a good, early witness to the NT text (it is an especially good witness to the original text of Revelation). Two hundred years later, a German scholar named Constantin von Tischendorf discovered Codex Sinaiticus in St Catherine’s Monastery (located near Mt Sinai). The manuscript, dated around <span>AD<\/span> 360, is one of the two oldest vellum (treated animal hide) manuscripts of the Greek NT. The earliest vellum manuscript, Codex Vaticanus, had been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1481, but it had not been made available to scholars until the middle of the 19th century. This manuscript, dated slightly earlier (<span>AD<\/span> 350) than Codex Sinaiticus, had both the OT and NT in Greek, excluding the last part of the NT (Hebrews 9:15 to Revelation 22:21 and the Pastoral Epistles). A hundred years of textual criticism has determined that this manuscript is one of the most accurate and reliable witnesses to the original text.<\/p>\n<p>Other early and important manuscripts were discovered in the 19th century. Through the tireless labors of men like Constantin von Tischendorf, Samuel Tregelles, and F. H. A. Scrivener, manuscripts such as Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, Codex Zacynthius, and Codex Augiensis were deciphered, collated, and published.<\/p>\n<p>As the various manuscripts were discovered and made public, certain scholars labored to compile a Greek text that would more closely represent the original text than did the Textus Receptus. Around 1700 John Mill produced an improved Textus Receptus, and in the 1730s Johannes Albert Bengel (known as the father of modern textual and philological studies in the NT) published a text that deviated from the Textus Receptus according to the evidence of earlier manuscripts.<\/p>\n<p>In the 1800s certain scholars began to abandon the Textus Receptus. Karl Lachman, a classical philologist, produced a fresh text (in 1831) that represented the fourth-century manuscripts. Samuel Tregelles (self-taught in Latin, Hebrew, and Greek), laboring throughout his entire lifetime, concentrated all of his efforts in publishing one Greek text (which came out in six parts, from 1857 to 1872). As is stated in the introduction to this work, Tregelles’s goal was “to exhibit the text of the NT in the very words in which it has been transmitted on the evidence of ancient authority.” Henry Alford also compiled a Greek text based upon the best and earliest manuscripts. In his preface to <em>The Greek New Testament<\/em> (a multivolume commentary on the Greek NT, published in 1849), Alford said he labored for the “demolition of the unworthy and pedantic reverence for the received text, which stood in the way of all chance of discovering the genuine word of God.”<\/p>\n<p>During this same era, Tischendorf was devoting a lifetime of labor to discovering manuscripts and producing accurate editions of the Greek NT. In a letter to his fiancé he wrote, “I am confronted with a sacred task, the struggle to regain the original form of the NT.” In fulfillment of his desire, he discovered Codex Sinaiticus, deciphered the palimpsest Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, collated countless manuscripts, and produced several editions of the Greek NT (the eighth edition is considered the best).<\/p>\n<p>Aided by the work of the previous scholars, two British men, Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort, worked together for 28 years to produce a volume entitled <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek<\/em> (1881). Along with this publication, they made known their theory (which was chiefly Hort’s) that Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus (along with a few other early manuscripts) represented a text that most closely replicated the original writing. They called this text the Neutral Text. (According to their studies, the Neutral Text described certain manuscripts that had the least amount of textual corruption.) This is the text that Westcott and Hort relied upon for compiling their volume.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th century was a fruitful era for the recovery of the Greek NT; the 20th century, no less so. Those living in the 20th century have witnessed the discovery of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, the Chester Beatty Papyri, and the Bodmer Papyri. To date, there are nearly 100 papyri containing portions of the NT—several of which date from the late first century to the early fourth century. These significant discoveries, providing scholars with many ancient manuscripts, have greatly enhanced the effort to recover the original wording of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>At the beginning of the 20th century, Eberhard Nestle used the best editions of the Greek NT produced in the 19th century to compile a text that represented the majority consensus. The work of making new editions was carried on by his son for several years, and then came under the care of Kurt Aland. The latest edition (the 27th) of Nestle-Aland’s <em>Novum Testamentum Graece<\/em> appeared in 1993. The same Greek text appears in another popular volume published by the United Bible Societies, called the <em>Greek New Testament<\/em> (fourth edition). Aland has argued that the Nestle-Aland text, 27th edition (NA<span>27<\/span>), comes closer to the original text of the NT than did Tischendorf or Westcott and Hort. And in several writings he intimates that NA<span>27<\/span> may very well be the original text. Though few, if any, scholars would agree with this, the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland text is regarded by many as representing the latest and best in textual scholarship.<\/p>\n<h5>New Testament Textual Criticism<\/h5>\n<p>Textual critics working with ancient literature universally acknowledge the supremacy of earlier manuscripts over later ones. Textual critics not working with the NT would love to have the same kind of early witnesses that biblical scholars possess. In fact, many of them work with manuscripts written 1,000 years after the autographs were composed! We all marvel that the Dead Sea Scrolls have provided a text that is nearly 800 years closer to the originals than the Masoretic manuscripts, and yet many of the Dead Sea manuscripts are still over 600 to 800 years removed from the time of original composition. NT textual critics have a great advantage!<\/p>\n<p>The 19th-century NT textual scholars—such as Lachmann, Tregelles, Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort—worked on the basis that the earliest witnesses are the best witnesses. Some textual scholars have continued this line of recovery using the testimony of the earlier witnesses. But many textual scholars since the time of Westcott and Hort have been less inclined to produce editions based on the theory that the earliest reading is the best. Most present-day textual critics are more inclined to endorse the maxim: the reading that is most likely original is the one that best explains the variants.<\/p>\n<p>This maxim (or “canon” as it is sometimes called), as good as it is, produces conflicting results. For example, two scholars, using this same principle to examine the same variant unit, will not agree. One will argue that one variant was produced by a copyist attempting to emulate the author’s style; the other will claim the same variant has to be original because it accords with the author’s style. One will argue that one variant was produced by an orthodox scribe attempting to rid the text of a reading that could be used to promote heterodoxy or heresy; another will claim that the same variant has to be original because it is orthodox and accords with Christian doctrine (thus a heterodox or heretical scribe must have changed it). Furthermore, this principle allows for the possibility that the reading selected for the text can be taken from any manuscript of any date. This can lead to subjective eclecticism.<\/p>\n<p>Modern textual scholars have attempted to temper the subjectivism by employing a method called “reasoned eclecticism.” This kind of eclecticism applies a combination of internal and external considerations, whereby the character of the variants is evaluated in light of the manuscripts’ evidence and vice versa. This is supposed to produce a balanced view and serve as a check against purely subjective tendencies.<\/p>\n<p>The Alands favor the same kind of approach, calling it the local-genealogical method, which is defined as follows:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>It is impossible to proceed from the assumption of a manuscript stemma, and on the basis of a full review and analysis of the relationships obtaining among the variety of interrelated branches in the manuscript tradition, to undertake a recension of the data as one would do with other Greek texts. Decisions must be made one by one, instance by instance. This method has been characterized as eclecticism, but wrongly so. After carefully establishing the variety of readings offered in a passage and the possibilities of their interpretation, it must always then be determined afresh on the basis of external and internal criteria which of these readings (and frequently they are quite numerous) is the original, from which the others may be regarded as derivative. From the perspective of our present knowledge, this “local-genealogical” method (if it must be given a name) is the only one which meets the requirements of the NT textual tradition. (Introduction to <em>Novum Testamentum Graece,<\/em> 26th edition)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The “local-genealogical” method assumes that for any given variation unit any manuscript (or manuscripts) may have preserved the original text. Applying this method produces an extremely uneven documentary presentation of the text. Anyone studying the critical apparatus of NA<span>27<\/span> will detect that there is not an even documentary presentation. The eclecticism is dispersed throughout the text.<\/p>\n<p>“Reasoned eclecticism” and\/or the “local-genealogical” method tend to give priority to internal evidence over external evidence. But it has to be the other way around if we are going to recover the original text. This was Westcott and Hort’s opinion. With respect to their compilation of <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> Hort wrote, “Documentary evidence has been in most cases allowed to confer the place of honour against internal evidence” (<em>The Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> p 17).<\/p>\n<p>In this respect, Westcott and Hort need to be revived. Earnest Colwell was of the same mind when he wrote “Hort Redivivus: A Plea and a Program.” Colwell decried the growing tendency to rely entirely on the internal evidence of readings, without serious consideration of documentary evidence. He called upon scholars to make an attempt to reconstruct a history of the manuscript tradition. The abundance of manuscripts—several of which are very early—will aid scholars in this ongoing task.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Manuscripts and Text of the (New Testament) Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar. Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all ...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Manuscripts and Text of the (New Testament) Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar. Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all ...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":6321,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Christ","title_en":"Christ","content_ro":"<h3>CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Christos<\/span><em>,<\/em> which translates Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Messiah<\/span> (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the title is used in combination with the given name, as “Jesus Christ” (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Rom 1:4), “Christ Jesus” (<span>niv<\/span> Rom 1:1; 1 Cor 1:1), with the article “the” (Rom 7:4), or with another title “Lord” (Rom 16:18). It is also used alone as the one favored substitute name or title for Jesus (Jn 20:31; Rom 15:3; Heb 3:6; 5:5; 1 Pt 1:11, 19).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels portray Jesus as modestly accepting the title and role of the Messiah. His baptism should be understood as his anointing to the threefold office of prophet, priest, and king. At his baptism by John (the new Elijah, Mt 11:14), Jesus received the outpouring of the Spirit and God’s mandate to begin his ministry (Mt 3:16–4:17). John himself denied being the anointed one but tacitly identified Jesus as the Christ (Jn 1:20; Lk 3:14-17). Jesus’ first disciples followed him because they knew he was the Messiah (Jn 1:41). The demons recognized him as “the Holy One [anointed] of God” (Mk 1:24; cf. Mt 8:29). The crowds followed him as the Prophet, the new Moses (Jn 6:14, 32), but deserted him when they understood that his kingdom was a spiritual, not a political realm (v 66). The Twelve remained loyal, saying, “We believe . . . you are the Holy One of God” (Jn 6:69, <span>niv<\/span>). The confession of the disciples voiced by Peter and approved by Jesus as a divine revelation is “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16, <span>niv<\/span>). At his trials the decisive factor in Jesus’ condemnation was his claim to be the Christ (Mt 26:63-64, 68; 27:11, 17, 22, 37).<\/p>\n<p>An important feature in the earliest Christian preaching was the proclamation that Jesus is the Christ (Acts 2:36; 3:18-20; 9:22; 28:23, 31). This remains the earliest (Mt 16:16) and most basic article of Christian confession (1 Cor 1:23; 1 Jn 5:1), affirming that Jesus perfectly fulfilled the role of anointed prophet, priest, and king as the servant of God for his people (Lk 7:16; 1 Cor 15:25; Heb 7:22-28; Rv 19:16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Messiah.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Christos<\/span><em>,<\/em> which translates Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Messiah<\/span> (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the title is used in combination with the given name, as “Jesus Christ” (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Rom 1:4), “Christ Jesus” (<span>niv<\/span> Rom 1:1; 1 Cor 1:1), with the article “the” (Rom 7:4), or with another title “Lord” (Rom 16:18). It is also used alone as the one favored substitute name or title for Jesus (Jn 20:31; Rom 15:3; Heb 3:6; 5:5; 1 Pt 1:11, 19).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels portray Jesus as modestly accepting the title and role of the Messiah. His baptism should be understood as his anointing to the threefold office of prophet, priest, and king. At his baptism by John (the new Elijah, Mt 11:14), Jesus received the outpouring of the Spirit and God’s mandate to begin his ministry (Mt 3:16–4:17). John himself denied being the anointed one but tacitly identified Jesus as the Christ (Jn 1:20; Lk 3:14-17). Jesus’ first disciples followed him because they knew he was the Messiah (Jn 1:41). The demons recognized him as “the Holy One [anointed] of God” (Mk 1:24; cf. Mt 8:29). The crowds followed him as the Prophet, the new Moses (Jn 6:14, 32), but deserted him when they understood that his kingdom was a spiritual, not a political realm (v 66). The Twelve remained loyal, saying, “We believe . . . you are the Holy One of God” (Jn 6:69, <span>niv<\/span>). The confession of the disciples voiced by Peter and approved by Jesus as a divine revelation is “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16, <span>niv<\/span>). At his trials the decisive factor in Jesus’ condemnation was his claim to be the Christ (Mt 26:63-64, 68; 27:11, 17, 22, 37).<\/p>\n<p>An important feature in the earliest Christian preaching was the proclamation that Jesus is the Christ (Acts 2:36; 3:18-20; 9:22; 28:23, 31). This remains the earliest (Mt 16:16) and most basic article of Christian confession (1 Cor 1:23; 1 Jn 5:1), affirming that Jesus perfectly fulfilled the role of anointed prophet, priest, and king as the servant of God for his people (Lk 7:16; 1 Cor 15:25; Heb 7:22-28; Rv 19:16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Messiah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CHRIST Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek Christos, which translates Hebrew Messiah (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function. In the NT the title is used i...","summary_en":"CHRIST Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek Christos, which translates Hebrew Messiah (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function. In the NT the title is used i...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11841,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Faith","title_en":"Faith","content_ro":"<h3>FAITH<\/h3>\n<p>Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DefinitionofFaith\">Definition of Faith<\/p>\n<p>In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a whole and embodied in personal life. In 2 Timothy 4:7, Paul witnesses to having “kept the faith.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheOldTestament\">Faith in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT also strongly emphasizes faith as confidence in God’s covenant or in the covenant God made with Abraham and his descendants. The call of Abraham and the promise that his descendants would be used in the history of redemption became the basis of the narratives of the OT, being seen as the working out of that covenant. Once the nation Israel was brought into being, God sustained and protected it. The exodus from Egypt is a prominent indication that God was at work restoring his people to the Promised Land. The obedience of the people of God as the proper expression of faith is seen clearly in the OT. Without seeing God, his people believed and obeyed him. Abraham left his native land to go into unknown territory. The people of Israel left Egypt following the leadership of God to a land they could not see. The promise of God gave them courage to possess the land promised to them. After the exodus, the covenant of Abraham was confirmed with the people of Israel by the sprinkling of blood (Ex 24:6-7). There was to be strict obedience to God’s commands as an expression of faith. This response of human faith to the Lord’s faithfulness was national and collective. There also were commands to, and instances of, personal faith.<\/p>\n<p>Not only the narrative and legal portions of the OT but also the poetic and prophetic writings emphasize faith. The Psalms abound in expressions of personal confidence in the Lord even in dark times. Habakkuk points out that “the righteous shall live by his faith” (Hb 2:4). From such instances it is clear that, as the Lord’s education of Israel proceeded, the matter of faith in God’s faithfulness became more and more a matter of individual and personal response, and it is in the Prophets that several ingredients—such as trust, obedience, fear, and certainty—blend into the understanding of such personal faith.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheNewTestament\">Faith in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>As over against the OT, where the accent is on the faithfulness of God, in the NT the emphasis is placed on the active, responding faith of the hearer to the promised, final revelation in the Messiah, Jesus. Both verb and noun regularly describe the adequate response of people to Jesus’ word and to the gospel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of the synoptic Gospels (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>) is the use of faith without identifying its object: “If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed” (Mt 17:20); “When Jesus saw their faith” (Mk 2:5); “Your faith has saved you” (Lk 7:50). Jesus is portrayed as one who by his work and word opens the door to faith and makes faith possible. The question is not whether the faith is in Jesus or in the Father; the implication is undoubtedly both, but as with every true bearer of the Word of God, the eye of faith is turned to the One who sends.<\/p>\n<p>On more than one occasion, Jesus denies the request for a miracle to substantiate his words (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1-4). Faith is response to the Word alone without any supporting props. No sign is to be given but the sign of Jonah. In the story of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:19-31), Jesus denies the request for the spectacular and insists that the hearer must respond to the word given to him (cf. Jn 20:29). The Word demands self-surrender and commitment. Hence, the very nature of the Word and of faith becomes an obstacle to the proud and the powerful.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is the medium by which the power of God is made visible. It moves mountains, heals the sick, and is the means of entrance into the kingdom. It may be mingled with doubt, as with the father who sought healing for his son (“I believe; help my unbelief!” [Mk 9:24]), or as with John the Baptist in prison, who, even with his doubts, was confirmed by Jesus as the greatest of the offspring of woman (Mt 11:2-15). Peter’s (and the other disciples’) perception was faulty, but Jesus affirms Peter’s confession as the foundation stone of the church. The synoptic Gospels portray the early faith of the disciples in all its limitations and weaknesses, yet it is still faith in that it is their positive response to Jesus’ word and work.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fourth Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>Faith is an especially significant concept in the Gospel of John (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), though the word (in the Greek) occurs only as a verb. Quite often the reference has to do with the acceptance that something is true, that is, simple credence, or belief: “Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me” (Jn 14:11); “If you believed Moses, you would believe me” (Jn 5:46).<\/p>\n<p>Even more significant is the special expression “to believe into” in the sense of putting one’s trust into another. The particular form of the expression is without parallel before the fourth Gospel and may well express the strong sense of personal trust in the eternal Word made flesh. In John 3:16, whoever puts trust in him has eternal life. Those who put their trust in him are given power to become sons of God—to be born of God (Jn 1:12). They will never thirst (6:35); they will live, even though they die (11:25).<\/p>\n<p>In other places, John speaks of trust or faith in an absolute sense, that is, without referring to the one in whom trust is placed. In John 11:15 Jesus arrives after the death of Lazarus and is glad “in order that you might believe.” The outcome is going to be faith. Similarly, in the prologue (1:7), John the Baptist bears witness in order that through him all might believe. As Jesus satisfies the doubt of Thomas concerning the resurrection, he says, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe” (20:29). In these and other passages the fundamental outcome of Jesus’ witness to himself is trust.<\/p>\n<p>Faith and knowledge are closely related. In John 6:69 Peter says, “We have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” In his priestly prayer Jesus says that eternal life is to “know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (Jn 17:3). Also, God is seen through the eyes of faith. No one has ever seen God, but the Only Begotten has revealed him (1:18). He who has seen Jesus has seen the Father (14:9).<\/p>\n<p>To believe is also expressed in the verb “receive.” Those who receive Christ are given power to become the sons of God (Jn 1:12). Trust is that form of knowing or seeing by which the glory of God (1:14; 17:4) is made present.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In Paul’s letters (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), he writes about faith from a number of angles. He sets faith over against “works of the law” as the only and true basis for righteousness (Rom 1–4; Gal 1–4) and appeals to Abraham to prove his point: “Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him for righteousness” (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:5; Gal 3:6). This is entirely apart from the law (Rom 3:21); righteousness is the gift of God through faith in Christ, specifically in his atoning work. Behind Paul’s conviction lies his awareness of the radical and pervasive sinfulness of humans that renders each one helpless. Humanity is dead in sin but is made alive by faith in the word and work of Jesus mediated through the gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Faith, then, is faith in Jesus Christ. The number of metaphors Paul employs to describe the consequences of faith is staggering. It is by faith that believers are justified (Rom 5:1), reconciled (2 Cor 5:18), redeemed (Eph 1:7), made alive (2:5), adopted into the family of God (Rom 8:15-16), re-created (2 Cor 5:17), transported into a new kingdom (Col 1:13), and set free (Gal 5:1). Faith is, for Paul, the <em>sine qua non<\/em> of every aspect of salvation, from the grace that convicts to the receiving of the full inheritance at the coming of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s letters, faith is bound up with love so that the great exponent of justification by faith becomes also the articulate exponent of distinctive Christian love. To say that faith is indispensable to salvation is only part of the truth, for faith expresses itself through love: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love” (Gal 5:6); “If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing” (1 Cor 13:2). Love is both the genesis and the ultimate expression of faith. Hence, even for Paul there can be no <em>total<\/em> separation between faith and works. This love of which Paul speaks is the essential fruit of the Spirit through whom the life of faith is lived. Only by virtue of the indwelling Spirit does faith find expression in love.<\/p>\n<h5>General Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>James speaks of faith as being completed by works (Jas 2:22). He opposed that concept of faith that thinks primarily of creedal assent, of believing that something is true without acting upon it. James, like Paul, assumes the primacy of faith, but he is warning against those who would draw wrong conclusions. Faith apart from works is not faith; it is barren (v 20). The practical dimension of faith is the burden of much of this epistle.<\/p>\n<p>The writer of Hebrews recognizes that faith has always been characteristic of the people of God and their specially called leaders. Faith makes substantial what is otherwise nebulous and uncertain; it makes evidential what is not visible. By faith the people of God have a more certain ground for their lives and their actions than the world is able to discern (Heb 11:1). The great cloud of witnesses (12:1) bear testimony by their faith to the faithfulness of God.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is opened up by the Word of God, finds expression through the Holy Spirit who is given, and bears witness to the lordship of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FAITH<\/h3>\n<p>Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DefinitionofFaith\">Definition of Faith<\/p>\n<p>In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a whole and embodied in personal life. In 2 Timothy 4:7, Paul witnesses to having “kept the faith.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheOldTestament\">Faith in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT also strongly emphasizes faith as confidence in God’s covenant or in the covenant God made with Abraham and his descendants. The call of Abraham and the promise that his descendants would be used in the history of redemption became the basis of the narratives of the OT, being seen as the working out of that covenant. Once the nation Israel was brought into being, God sustained and protected it. The exodus from Egypt is a prominent indication that God was at work restoring his people to the Promised Land. The obedience of the people of God as the proper expression of faith is seen clearly in the OT. Without seeing God, his people believed and obeyed him. Abraham left his native land to go into unknown territory. The people of Israel left Egypt following the leadership of God to a land they could not see. The promise of God gave them courage to possess the land promised to them. After the exodus, the covenant of Abraham was confirmed with the people of Israel by the sprinkling of blood (Ex 24:6-7). There was to be strict obedience to God’s commands as an expression of faith. This response of human faith to the Lord’s faithfulness was national and collective. There also were commands to, and instances of, personal faith.<\/p>\n<p>Not only the narrative and legal portions of the OT but also the poetic and prophetic writings emphasize faith. The Psalms abound in expressions of personal confidence in the Lord even in dark times. Habakkuk points out that “the righteous shall live by his faith” (Hb 2:4). From such instances it is clear that, as the Lord’s education of Israel proceeded, the matter of faith in God’s faithfulness became more and more a matter of individual and personal response, and it is in the Prophets that several ingredients—such as trust, obedience, fear, and certainty—blend into the understanding of such personal faith.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheNewTestament\">Faith in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>As over against the OT, where the accent is on the faithfulness of God, in the NT the emphasis is placed on the active, responding faith of the hearer to the promised, final revelation in the Messiah, Jesus. Both verb and noun regularly describe the adequate response of people to Jesus’ word and to the gospel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of the synoptic Gospels (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>) is the use of faith without identifying its object: “If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed” (Mt 17:20); “When Jesus saw their faith” (Mk 2:5); “Your faith has saved you” (Lk 7:50). Jesus is portrayed as one who by his work and word opens the door to faith and makes faith possible. The question is not whether the faith is in Jesus or in the Father; the implication is undoubtedly both, but as with every true bearer of the Word of God, the eye of faith is turned to the One who sends.<\/p>\n<p>On more than one occasion, Jesus denies the request for a miracle to substantiate his words (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1-4). Faith is response to the Word alone without any supporting props. No sign is to be given but the sign of Jonah. In the story of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:19-31), Jesus denies the request for the spectacular and insists that the hearer must respond to the word given to him (cf. Jn 20:29). The Word demands self-surrender and commitment. Hence, the very nature of the Word and of faith becomes an obstacle to the proud and the powerful.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is the medium by which the power of God is made visible. It moves mountains, heals the sick, and is the means of entrance into the kingdom. It may be mingled with doubt, as with the father who sought healing for his son (“I believe; help my unbelief!” [Mk 9:24]), or as with John the Baptist in prison, who, even with his doubts, was confirmed by Jesus as the greatest of the offspring of woman (Mt 11:2-15). Peter’s (and the other disciples’) perception was faulty, but Jesus affirms Peter’s confession as the foundation stone of the church. The synoptic Gospels portray the early faith of the disciples in all its limitations and weaknesses, yet it is still faith in that it is their positive response to Jesus’ word and work.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fourth Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>Faith is an especially significant concept in the Gospel of John (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), though the word (in the Greek) occurs only as a verb. Quite often the reference has to do with the acceptance that something is true, that is, simple credence, or belief: “Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me” (Jn 14:11); “If you believed Moses, you would believe me” (Jn 5:46).<\/p>\n<p>Even more significant is the special expression “to believe into” in the sense of putting one’s trust into another. The particular form of the expression is without parallel before the fourth Gospel and may well express the strong sense of personal trust in the eternal Word made flesh. In John 3:16, whoever puts trust in him has eternal life. Those who put their trust in him are given power to become sons of God—to be born of God (Jn 1:12). They will never thirst (6:35); they will live, even though they die (11:25).<\/p>\n<p>In other places, John speaks of trust or faith in an absolute sense, that is, without referring to the one in whom trust is placed. In John 11:15 Jesus arrives after the death of Lazarus and is glad “in order that you might believe.” The outcome is going to be faith. Similarly, in the prologue (1:7), John the Baptist bears witness in order that through him all might believe. As Jesus satisfies the doubt of Thomas concerning the resurrection, he says, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe” (20:29). In these and other passages the fundamental outcome of Jesus’ witness to himself is trust.<\/p>\n<p>Faith and knowledge are closely related. In John 6:69 Peter says, “We have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” In his priestly prayer Jesus says that eternal life is to “know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (Jn 17:3). Also, God is seen through the eyes of faith. No one has ever seen God, but the Only Begotten has revealed him (1:18). He who has seen Jesus has seen the Father (14:9).<\/p>\n<p>To believe is also expressed in the verb “receive.” Those who receive Christ are given power to become the sons of God (Jn 1:12). Trust is that form of knowing or seeing by which the glory of God (1:14; 17:4) is made present.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In Paul’s letters (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), he writes about faith from a number of angles. He sets faith over against “works of the law” as the only and true basis for righteousness (Rom 1–4; Gal 1–4) and appeals to Abraham to prove his point: “Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him for righteousness” (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:5; Gal 3:6). This is entirely apart from the law (Rom 3:21); righteousness is the gift of God through faith in Christ, specifically in his atoning work. Behind Paul’s conviction lies his awareness of the radical and pervasive sinfulness of humans that renders each one helpless. Humanity is dead in sin but is made alive by faith in the word and work of Jesus mediated through the gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Faith, then, is faith in Jesus Christ. The number of metaphors Paul employs to describe the consequences of faith is staggering. It is by faith that believers are justified (Rom 5:1), reconciled (2 Cor 5:18), redeemed (Eph 1:7), made alive (2:5), adopted into the family of God (Rom 8:15-16), re-created (2 Cor 5:17), transported into a new kingdom (Col 1:13), and set free (Gal 5:1). Faith is, for Paul, the <em>sine qua non<\/em> of every aspect of salvation, from the grace that convicts to the receiving of the full inheritance at the coming of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s letters, faith is bound up with love so that the great exponent of justification by faith becomes also the articulate exponent of distinctive Christian love. To say that faith is indispensable to salvation is only part of the truth, for faith expresses itself through love: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love” (Gal 5:6); “If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing” (1 Cor 13:2). Love is both the genesis and the ultimate expression of faith. Hence, even for Paul there can be no <em>total<\/em> separation between faith and works. This love of which Paul speaks is the essential fruit of the Spirit through whom the life of faith is lived. Only by virtue of the indwelling Spirit does faith find expression in love.<\/p>\n<h5>General Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>James speaks of faith as being completed by works (Jas 2:22). He opposed that concept of faith that thinks primarily of creedal assent, of believing that something is true without acting upon it. James, like Paul, assumes the primacy of faith, but he is warning against those who would draw wrong conclusions. Faith apart from works is not faith; it is barren (v 20). The practical dimension of faith is the burden of much of this epistle.<\/p>\n<p>The writer of Hebrews recognizes that faith has always been characteristic of the people of God and their specially called leaders. Faith makes substantial what is otherwise nebulous and uncertain; it makes evidential what is not visible. By faith the people of God have a more certain ground for their lives and their actions than the world is able to discern (Heb 11:1). The great cloud of witnesses (12:1) bear testimony by their faith to the faithfulness of God.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is opened up by the Word of God, finds expression through the Holy Spirit who is given, and bears witness to the lordship of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FAITH Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God. Definition of Faith In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a...","summary_en":"FAITH Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God. Definition of Faith In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35565,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of Christ*, Sinlessness","title_en":"of Christ*, Sinlessness","content_ro":"<h3>SINLESSNESS OF CHRIST*<\/h3>\n<p>The Scripture (quoted here from the <span>rsv<\/span>) leaves no question that Christ is regarded as sinless. He is declared to be the perfect Son of God in every respect. His human nature is holy, without any sin. This is repeatedly and explicitly affirmed in unmistakable terms. Paul states that Christ “knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21). Peter says “he committed no sin; no guile was found on his lips” (1 Pt 2:22); he calls him “righteous” (3:18). The writer to the Hebrews says that Christ is “holy, blameless, unstained, separated from sinners” (Heb 7:26). James speaks of him as “the righteous man” (Jas 5:6), and John affirms that “in him there is no sin” (1 Jn 3:5). In the Gospels and in the apostolic preaching, Jesus is repeatedly witnessed to as the Holy Son of God, the Holy One of God, the Holy and Righteous One (Lk 1:35; Jn 6:69; Acts 3:14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was able to ask his enemies with penetrating conviction, “Which of you convicts me of sin?” (Jn 8:46). He gives ample evidence of a holy self-consciousness throughout his entire lifetime. Numerous references and inferences are made to his exemption from the unrighteousness of sin and disobedience. He kept the entire law in every detail and in each respect (Rom 10:4; Heb 4:15). Pilate’s wife regarded Jesus as a righteous man, and Pilate himself spoke of him as an innocent man (Mt 27:19, 24). Even Judas realized that he himself had sinned by “betraying innocent blood” (Mt 27:4).<\/p>\n<p>The issue of Christ’s sinlessness is not confined merely to the fact that he did not commit any sin. There is a deeper theological significance to the question, which has to do with the issue of whether Christ was at all able to sin. Was it even possible for him to sin? This concern has been spoken of in theology as his impeccability (Christ was unable to sin), or on the contrary position, his peccability (Christ was able to sin, even though he did not exercise his will in this direction). The problems on both of these views appear immediately: If Christ was unable to sin, how could he really have been tempted (and we have ample data in Scripture concerning Jesus’ temptations)? If Christ could have sinned, even though he did not do so, does this mean that God can sin (for Christ was in every respect fully the Son of God, the second person of the Trinity)? It is useless to say that Jesus could have sinned with respect to his human nature but not so with respect to his divine nature, because this ignores the indissoluble unity of the person of the God-man. We may not separate the human nature from the divine nature, as though in his humanity he could have acted independently of his divinity. This was, in part, the error of the ancient Nestorian heretics. Whatever the Son of God does, he does with and in his entire divine-human nature.<\/p>\n<p>Essentially, there is no contradiction between being tempted and being unable to sin. Of course, it is difficult for us to imagine how this can be possible. This is because we are sinners and stand within the experiential knowledge of evil. Christ’s person is absolutely unique; we can little imagine how real were his temptations by the devil in the wilderness and throughout his life (Lk 22:28, 39-46), even though it was impossible for him to actually sin.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps an illustration may be helpful. Let us imagine there is an absolutely impregnable fortress that cannot be taken by the enemy as long as the defenses are maintained. (If we may, for the purpose of illustration, let us rule out the terrible destructive forces of modern warfare.) Because the fortress is incapable of being taken by assault and is in reality unconquerable, as long as the defenses are kept up, it does not mean that it cannot be besieged and furiously attacked. So it may be with respect to the reality of Christ’s temptations and his inability to sin as the Holy Son of God.<\/p>\n<p>His temptations were real. Therefore, “we have not a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need” (Heb 4:15-16, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SINLESSNESS OF CHRIST*<\/h3>\n<p>The Scripture (quoted here from the <span>rsv<\/span>) leaves no question that Christ is regarded as sinless. He is declared to be the perfect Son of God in every respect. His human nature is holy, without any sin. This is repeatedly and explicitly affirmed in unmistakable terms. Paul states that Christ “knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21). Peter says “he committed no sin; no guile was found on his lips” (1 Pt 2:22); he calls him “righteous” (3:18). The writer to the Hebrews says that Christ is “holy, blameless, unstained, separated from sinners” (Heb 7:26). James speaks of him as “the righteous man” (Jas 5:6), and John affirms that “in him there is no sin” (1 Jn 3:5). In the Gospels and in the apostolic preaching, Jesus is repeatedly witnessed to as the Holy Son of God, the Holy One of God, the Holy and Righteous One (Lk 1:35; Jn 6:69; Acts 3:14).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was able to ask his enemies with penetrating conviction, “Which of you convicts me of sin?” (Jn 8:46). He gives ample evidence of a holy self-consciousness throughout his entire lifetime. Numerous references and inferences are made to his exemption from the unrighteousness of sin and disobedience. He kept the entire law in every detail and in each respect (Rom 10:4; Heb 4:15). Pilate’s wife regarded Jesus as a righteous man, and Pilate himself spoke of him as an innocent man (Mt 27:19, 24). Even Judas realized that he himself had sinned by “betraying innocent blood” (Mt 27:4).<\/p>\n<p>The issue of Christ’s sinlessness is not confined merely to the fact that he did not commit any sin. There is a deeper theological significance to the question, which has to do with the issue of whether Christ was at all able to sin. Was it even possible for him to sin? This concern has been spoken of in theology as his impeccability (Christ was unable to sin), or on the contrary position, his peccability (Christ was able to sin, even though he did not exercise his will in this direction). The problems on both of these views appear immediately: If Christ was unable to sin, how could he really have been tempted (and we have ample data in Scripture concerning Jesus’ temptations)? If Christ could have sinned, even though he did not do so, does this mean that God can sin (for Christ was in every respect fully the Son of God, the second person of the Trinity)? It is useless to say that Jesus could have sinned with respect to his human nature but not so with respect to his divine nature, because this ignores the indissoluble unity of the person of the God-man. We may not separate the human nature from the divine nature, as though in his humanity he could have acted independently of his divinity. This was, in part, the error of the ancient Nestorian heretics. Whatever the Son of God does, he does with and in his entire divine-human nature.<\/p>\n<p>Essentially, there is no contradiction between being tempted and being unable to sin. Of course, it is difficult for us to imagine how this can be possible. This is because we are sinners and stand within the experiential knowledge of evil. Christ’s person is absolutely unique; we can little imagine how real were his temptations by the devil in the wilderness and throughout his life (Lk 22:28, 39-46), even though it was impossible for him to actually sin.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps an illustration may be helpful. Let us imagine there is an absolutely impregnable fortress that cannot be taken by the enemy as long as the defenses are maintained. (If we may, for the purpose of illustration, let us rule out the terrible destructive forces of modern warfare.) Because the fortress is incapable of being taken by assault and is in reality unconquerable, as long as the defenses are kept up, it does not mean that it cannot be besieged and furiously attacked. So it may be with respect to the reality of Christ’s temptations and his inability to sin as the Holy Son of God.<\/p>\n<p>His temptations were real. Therefore, “we have not a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need” (Heb 4:15-16, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"SINLESSNESS OF CHRIST* The Scripture (quoted here from the rsv) leaves no question that Christ is regarded as sinless. He is declared to be the perfect Son of God in every respect. His human nature is holy, without any sin. This is repeatedly and explicitly affirmed in unmistakable terms. Paul states that Christ “knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21). Peter says “he committed no sin; no guile was found on his lips” (1 Pt 2:22); he calls him “righteous” (3:18). The writer to the Hebrews says that Christ i...","summary_en":"SINLESSNESS OF CHRIST* The Scripture (quoted here from the rsv) leaves no question that Christ is regarded as sinless. He is declared to be the perfect Son of God in every respect. His human nature is holy, without any sin. This is repeatedly and explicitly affirmed in unmistakable terms. Paul states that Christ “knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21). Peter says “he committed no sin; no guile was found on his lips” (1 Pt 2:22); he calls him “righteous” (3:18). The writer to the Hebrews says that Christ i...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"70":[{"id":42270,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69896,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97522,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125148,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judas Iscariot","title_en":"Judas Iscariot","content_ro":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judas Iscariot<\/h3>\n<p>Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16).<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22).<\/p>\n<p>Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convinced him to betray Jesus (Matt 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus called Judas himself a devil (John 6:70-71) and predicted the betrayal (Mark 14:18-21). The devil put the idea of betrayal into Judas’s mind, and Satan “entered” him at the time of the betrayal (Luke 22:3-4; John 13:2, 27). Judas led a group of soldiers and officers to the garden of Gethsemane in the middle of the night, where he found Jesus and betrayed him with a prearranged signal, a kiss of greeting (Mark 14:43-46). Later, Judas was apparently overcome by remorse for betraying an innocent man, and he hanged himself (Matt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly understood Judas’s betrayal as part of God’s plan for redemption: It brought about the death of the Messiah as the ultimate sacrifice for sin (Matt 26:24, 53-54; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22; John 17:12). Even though Judas served God’s plan, his tragic end was clearly deserved (Acts 1:24-25). It would have been better for Judas if he had never been born (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21). Judas’s fate soberly warns those who are apparently followers of Jesus but have never committed themselves to him personally (cp. Heb 6:4-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:4; 26:14-16, 23-25, 46-50; 27:3-10; Mark 3:19; 14:10-11, 18-21, 43-45; Luke 6:16; 22:3-6, 22, 47-48; John 6:70-71; 12:4-6; 13:2, 18, 21-30; 17:12; 18:2-5; Acts 1:16-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","summary_en":"Judas Iscariot Judas Iscariot is infamous for betraying Jesus to the authorities (Matt 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). The meaning of the name “Iscariot” is uncertain; it might refer to a village named Kerioth. He is not the same person as Judas son of James (Luke 6:16; John 14:22). Among the apostles, Judas Iscariot came to be known as greedy; he carried the money bag and had the reputation of stealing from it (John 12:4-6). The money offered him as a bribe by the leading priests later convince...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":10410,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Election Elect","title_en":"Election Elect","content_ro":"<h3>ELECT, ELECTION<\/h3>\n<p>In modern English, terms referring to the selection of a leader or representative by a group of people. An element of choice is involved, since usually there are several candidates out of whom one must be chosen.<\/p>\n<p>When the verb “elect” is used theologically in the Bible, it usually has God as its subject. In the OT it is used for God’s choice of Israel to be his people (cf. Acts 13:17). Israel became God’s people, not because they decided to belong to him, but because he took the initiative and chose them. Nor did God’s choice rest on any particular virtues that his people exemplified, but rather on his promise to their forefather Abraham (Dt 7:7-8). God also chose their leaders, such as Saul and David (1 Sm 10:24; 2 Sm 6:21), apart from any popular vote by the people. The word thus indicates God’s prerogative in deciding what shall happen, independent of human choice.<\/p>\n\n<p>The same thoughts are found in the NT. God’s people are described as his “elect” or “chosen ones,” a term used by Jesus when speaking of the future time when the Son of Man will come and gather together God’s people (Mk 13:20, 27). He will vindicate them for their sufferings and for their patience in waiting for his coming (Lk 18:7). In 1 Peter 2:9, God’s people are called a “chosen [elect] nation.” This phrase was originally used of the people of Israel (Is 43:20), and it brings out the fact that the people of God in the OT and the Christian church in the NT stand in continuity with each other; the promises addressed to Israel now find fulfillment in the church.<\/p>\n<p>In Romans 9–11 Paul discusses the problem of why the people of Israel as a nation have rejected the gospel, while the Gentiles have accepted it. He states that in the present time there is a “remnant” of Israel as a result of God’s gracious choice of them. This group is “the elect.” They are the chosen people who have obtained what was meant for Israel as a whole, while the greater mass of the people have failed to obtain it because they were “hardened” as a result of their sin (Rom 11:5-7).<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, God’s choice of Israel to be his people has not been canceled. Most Jewish people have aligned themselves against the gospel, so that the Gentiles may come in and receive God’s blessings in their place; however, they still are loved by God, and God will not go back on his original calling of them (Rom 11:28). Consequently, Paul is confident that in due time there will be a general return to God by the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The word translated “elect” is generally found in the plural and refers either to the members of God’s people as a whole or to those in a particular local church (Rom 8:33; Col 3:12; 1 Thes 1:4; 2 Tm 2:10; Ti 1:1; 1 Pt 1:1-2; 2 Pt 1:10; Rv 17:14; cf. Rom 16:13 and 2 Jn 1:13, which have the singular form). The use of the plural may partly be explained by the fact that most of the NT letters are addressed to groups of people rather than to individuals. More probably, however, the point is that God’s election is concerned with the creation of a collective people rather than the calling of isolated individuals.<\/p>\n<p>The word “election” emphasizes that membership of God’s people is due to God’s initiative, prior to all human response, made before time began (Eph 1:4; cf. Jn 15:16, 19). It is God who has called men and women to be his people, and those who respond are elect. God’s call does not depend on any virtues or merits of humankind. Indeed, he chooses the foolish things by worldly standards to shame the wise, the weak to confound the strong, and the lowly and insignificant to bring to nothing those who think that they are something (1 Cor 1:27-28). The effect of election is to leave no grounds whatever for human boasting in achievement and position. Whatever the elect are, they owe it entirely to God, and they cannot boast or compare themselves with other people.<\/p>\n<p>God’s elect are a privileged people. Since they now have God to uphold them, no one can bring any accusation against them that might lead to God’s condemnation (Rom 8:33). They constitute a royal priesthood; they are God’s servants with the right of access to him (1 Pt 2:9). It is for their sake that the apostles endured hardship and suffering, so that they might enjoy future salvation and eternal glory (2 Tm 2:10).<\/p>\n<p>The elect are distinguished by their faith in God (Ti 1:1), and they are called to show the character that befits God’s people (Col 3:12). They must make their calling and election sure; that is, they must show that they belong to God by the quality of their lives (2 Pt 1:10). They must continue being faithful to the One who called them (Rv 17:14).<\/p>\n<p>The relationship between God’s call and human response is explained in Matthew 22:14: “For many are called, but few are chosen.” Although God calls many through the gospel, only some of those respond to the call and become his elect people. The text sheds no light on the mystery of why only some become God’s people. Certainly, when a person does respond to God’s call, it is because the gospel comes to him or her “in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction” (1 Thes 1:4-5). When men and women refuse the gospel, it is because they have become hardened as a result of sin and their trust in their own works. Scripture does not go beyond that point in explanation, and neither should Christians.<\/p>\n<p>“Election” can also be used of God’s choice of people to serve him. Jesus chose the 12 disciples out of the larger company of those who followed him (Lk 6:13; Acts 1:2). The same thought reappears in John’s Gospel; Jesus commented that although he chose the Twelve, one of them turned out to be a devil (Jn 6:70; 13:18). When a replacement was needed for Judas, the church prayed to Jesus and asked him to show them which of the two available candidates he would choose to fill the gap in the Twelve (Acts 1:24). Peter attributes his evangelism among the Gentiles to God’s election of him for that purpose (15:7). Similarly, Paul was an elected instrument for God’s mission to the Gentiles (9:15). The initiative in Christian mission rests with God, who elects people to serve him in particular ways.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Foreknowledge; Foreordination.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ELECT, ELECTION<\/h3>\n<p>In modern English, terms referring to the selection of a leader or representative by a group of people. An element of choice is involved, since usually there are several candidates out of whom one must be chosen.<\/p>\n<p>When the verb “elect” is used theologically in the Bible, it usually has God as its subject. In the OT it is used for God’s choice of Israel to be his people (cf. Acts 13:17). Israel became God’s people, not because they decided to belong to him, but because he took the initiative and chose them. Nor did God’s choice rest on any particular virtues that his people exemplified, but rather on his promise to their forefather Abraham (Dt 7:7-8). God also chose their leaders, such as Saul and David (1 Sm 10:24; 2 Sm 6:21), apart from any popular vote by the people. The word thus indicates God’s prerogative in deciding what shall happen, independent of human choice.<\/p>\n\n<p>The same thoughts are found in the NT. God’s people are described as his “elect” or “chosen ones,” a term used by Jesus when speaking of the future time when the Son of Man will come and gather together God’s people (Mk 13:20, 27). He will vindicate them for their sufferings and for their patience in waiting for his coming (Lk 18:7). In 1 Peter 2:9, God’s people are called a “chosen [elect] nation.” This phrase was originally used of the people of Israel (Is 43:20), and it brings out the fact that the people of God in the OT and the Christian church in the NT stand in continuity with each other; the promises addressed to Israel now find fulfillment in the church.<\/p>\n<p>In Romans 9–11 Paul discusses the problem of why the people of Israel as a nation have rejected the gospel, while the Gentiles have accepted it. He states that in the present time there is a “remnant” of Israel as a result of God’s gracious choice of them. This group is “the elect.” They are the chosen people who have obtained what was meant for Israel as a whole, while the greater mass of the people have failed to obtain it because they were “hardened” as a result of their sin (Rom 11:5-7).<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, God’s choice of Israel to be his people has not been canceled. Most Jewish people have aligned themselves against the gospel, so that the Gentiles may come in and receive God’s blessings in their place; however, they still are loved by God, and God will not go back on his original calling of them (Rom 11:28). Consequently, Paul is confident that in due time there will be a general return to God by the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The word translated “elect” is generally found in the plural and refers either to the members of God’s people as a whole or to those in a particular local church (Rom 8:33; Col 3:12; 1 Thes 1:4; 2 Tm 2:10; Ti 1:1; 1 Pt 1:1-2; 2 Pt 1:10; Rv 17:14; cf. Rom 16:13 and 2 Jn 1:13, which have the singular form). The use of the plural may partly be explained by the fact that most of the NT letters are addressed to groups of people rather than to individuals. More probably, however, the point is that God’s election is concerned with the creation of a collective people rather than the calling of isolated individuals.<\/p>\n<p>The word “election” emphasizes that membership of God’s people is due to God’s initiative, prior to all human response, made before time began (Eph 1:4; cf. Jn 15:16, 19). It is God who has called men and women to be his people, and those who respond are elect. God’s call does not depend on any virtues or merits of humankind. Indeed, he chooses the foolish things by worldly standards to shame the wise, the weak to confound the strong, and the lowly and insignificant to bring to nothing those who think that they are something (1 Cor 1:27-28). The effect of election is to leave no grounds whatever for human boasting in achievement and position. Whatever the elect are, they owe it entirely to God, and they cannot boast or compare themselves with other people.<\/p>\n<p>God’s elect are a privileged people. Since they now have God to uphold them, no one can bring any accusation against them that might lead to God’s condemnation (Rom 8:33). They constitute a royal priesthood; they are God’s servants with the right of access to him (1 Pt 2:9). It is for their sake that the apostles endured hardship and suffering, so that they might enjoy future salvation and eternal glory (2 Tm 2:10).<\/p>\n<p>The elect are distinguished by their faith in God (Ti 1:1), and they are called to show the character that befits God’s people (Col 3:12). They must make their calling and election sure; that is, they must show that they belong to God by the quality of their lives (2 Pt 1:10). They must continue being faithful to the One who called them (Rv 17:14).<\/p>\n<p>The relationship between God’s call and human response is explained in Matthew 22:14: “For many are called, but few are chosen.” Although God calls many through the gospel, only some of those respond to the call and become his elect people. The text sheds no light on the mystery of why only some become God’s people. Certainly, when a person does respond to God’s call, it is because the gospel comes to him or her “in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction” (1 Thes 1:4-5). When men and women refuse the gospel, it is because they have become hardened as a result of sin and their trust in their own works. Scripture does not go beyond that point in explanation, and neither should Christians.<\/p>\n<p>“Election” can also be used of God’s choice of people to serve him. Jesus chose the 12 disciples out of the larger company of those who followed him (Lk 6:13; Acts 1:2). The same thought reappears in John’s Gospel; Jesus commented that although he chose the Twelve, one of them turned out to be a devil (Jn 6:70; 13:18). When a replacement was needed for Judas, the church prayed to Jesus and asked him to show them which of the two available candidates he would choose to fill the gap in the Twelve (Acts 1:24). Peter attributes his evangelism among the Gentiles to God’s election of him for that purpose (15:7). Similarly, Paul was an elected instrument for God’s mission to the Gentiles (9:15). The initiative in Christian mission rests with God, who elects people to serve him in particular ways.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Foreknowledge; Foreordination.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ELECT, ELECTION In modern English, terms referring to the selection of a leader or representative by a group of people. An element of choice is involved, since usually there are several candidates out of whom one must be chosen. When the verb “elect” is used theologically in the Bible, it usually has God as its subject. In the OT it is used for God’s choice of Israel to be his people (cf. Acts 13:17). Israel became God’s people, not because they decided to belong to him, but because he took t...","summary_en":"ELECT, ELECTION In modern English, terms referring to the selection of a leader or representative by a group of people. An element of choice is involved, since usually there are several candidates out of whom one must be chosen. When the verb “elect” is used theologically in the Bible, it usually has God as its subject. In the OT it is used for God’s choice of Israel to be his people (cf. Acts 13:17). Israel became God’s people, not because they decided to belong to him, but because he took t...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":56456,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:70","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:70","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v 5\"><strong>6:70-71<\/strong> Once again Jesus demonstrated supernatural knowledge (see 1:47-49; 4:16-19). <em>Judas<\/em> would work for evil and <em>betray<\/em> Jesus to the authorities (12:4; 13:2; Matt 26:14-16). • <em>Iscariot<\/em> means “man from Kerioth,” the home village of Judas’s family.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v 5\"><strong>6:70-71<\/strong> Once again Jesus demonstrated supernatural knowledge (see 1:47-49; 4:16-19). <em>Judas<\/em> would work for evil and <em>betray<\/em> Jesus to the authorities (12:4; 13:2; Matt 26:14-16). • <em>Iscariot<\/em> means “man from Kerioth,” the home village of Judas’s family.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:70-71 Once again Jesus demonstrated supernatural knowledge (see 1:47-49; 4:16-19). Judas would work for evil and betray Jesus to the authorities (12:4; 13:2; Matt 26:14-16). • Iscariot means “man from Kerioth,” the home village of Judas’s family.","summary_en":"6:70-71 Once again Jesus demonstrated supernatural knowledge (see 1:47-49; 4:16-19). Judas would work for evil and betray Jesus to the authorities (12:4; 13:2; Matt 26:14-16). • Iscariot means “man from Kerioth,” the home village of Judas’s family.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":84082,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:70","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:70","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v 5\"><strong>6:70-71<\/strong> Once again Jesus demonstrated supernatural knowledge (see 1:47-49; 4:16-19). <em>Judas<\/em> would work for evil and <em>betray<\/em> Jesus to the authorities (12:4; 13:2; Matt 26:14-16). • <em>Iscariot<\/em> means “man from Kerioth,” the home village of Judas’s family.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v 5\"><strong>6:70-71<\/strong> Once again Jesus demonstrated supernatural knowledge (see 1:47-49; 4:16-19). <em>Judas<\/em> would work for evil and <em>betray<\/em> Jesus to the authorities (12:4; 13:2; Matt 26:14-16). • <em>Iscariot<\/em> means “man from Kerioth,” the home village of Judas’s family.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:70-71 Once again Jesus demonstrated supernatural knowledge (see 1:47-49; 4:16-19). Judas would work for evil and betray Jesus to the authorities (12:4; 13:2; Matt 26:14-16). • Iscariot means “man from Kerioth,” the home village of Judas’s family.","summary_en":"6:70-71 Once again Jesus demonstrated supernatural knowledge (see 1:47-49; 4:16-19). Judas would work for evil and betray Jesus to the authorities (12:4; 13:2; Matt 26:14-16). • Iscariot means “man from Kerioth,” the home village of Judas’s family.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":111708,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:70","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:70","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v 5\"><strong>6:70-71<\/strong> Once again Jesus demonstrated supernatural knowledge (see 1:47-49; 4:16-19). <em>Judas<\/em> would work for evil and <em>betray<\/em> Jesus to the authorities (12:4; 13:2; Matt 26:14-16). • <em>Iscariot<\/em> means “man from Kerioth,” the home village of Judas’s family.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v 5\"><strong>6:70-71<\/strong> Once again Jesus demonstrated supernatural knowledge (see 1:47-49; 4:16-19). <em>Judas<\/em> would work for evil and <em>betray<\/em> Jesus to the authorities (12:4; 13:2; Matt 26:14-16). • <em>Iscariot<\/em> means “man from Kerioth,” the home village of Judas’s family.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:70-71 Once again Jesus demonstrated supernatural knowledge (see 1:47-49; 4:16-19). Judas would work for evil and betray Jesus to the authorities (12:4; 13:2; Matt 26:14-16). • Iscariot means “man from Kerioth,” the home village of Judas’s family.","summary_en":"6:70-71 Once again Jesus demonstrated supernatural knowledge (see 1:47-49; 4:16-19). Judas would work for evil and betray Jesus to the authorities (12:4; 13:2; Matt 26:14-16). • Iscariot means “man from Kerioth,” the home village of Judas’s family.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":139334,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Ioan 6:70","title_en":"Study Note: Ioan 6:70","content_ro":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v 5\"><strong>6:70-71<\/strong> Once again Jesus demonstrated supernatural knowledge (see 1:47-49; 4:16-19). <em>Judas<\/em> would work for evil and <em>betray<\/em> Jesus to the authorities (12:4; 13:2; Matt 26:14-16). • <em>Iscariot<\/em> means “man from Kerioth,” the home village of Judas’s family.<\/p>","content_en":"<p class=\"sn-text\" ts=\"sn-text -1v 5\"><strong>6:70-71<\/strong> Once again Jesus demonstrated supernatural knowledge (see 1:47-49; 4:16-19). <em>Judas<\/em> would work for evil and <em>betray<\/em> Jesus to the authorities (12:4; 13:2; Matt 26:14-16). • <em>Iscariot<\/em> means “man from Kerioth,” the home village of Judas’s family.<\/p>","summary_ro":"6:70-71 Once again Jesus demonstrated supernatural knowledge (see 1:47-49; 4:16-19). Judas would work for evil and betray Jesus to the authorities (12:4; 13:2; Matt 26:14-16). • Iscariot means “man from Kerioth,” the home village of Judas’s family.","summary_en":"6:70-71 Once again Jesus demonstrated supernatural knowledge (see 1:47-49; 4:16-19). Judas would work for evil and betray Jesus to the authorities (12:4; 13:2; Matt 26:14-16). • Iscariot means “man from Kerioth,” the home village of Judas’s family.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"71":[{"id":29777,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Perseverance","title_en":"Perseverance","content_ro":"<h3>PERSEVERANCE<\/h3>\n<p>Action or condition of steadfastness. OT Israel waited generations for fulfillment of promises that many believers never lived to see (Heb 11:1, 13, 21-22, 39). The promise to Abraham sustained hope for centuries before Canaan was possessed. The lesson of the wilderness journey, when the waning of initial zeal prevented the people from entering the Promised Land, was never forgotten (3:16-19). Prophets looked constantly beyond failure and tragedy to distant horizons, and they nourished a patient faith (Jer 32:1-15; Hos 3:4-5; Jl 2:28-29; Hb 2:1-3; Dn 12:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The NT everywhere urges similar perseverance. Among several Greek expressions, the usual word, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">proskartereo<\/span><em>,<\/em> has the root meaning “to attend continually, adhere steadfastly” (Mk 3:9; Acts 8:13; 10:7; Rom 13:6), and is variously translated “devoted,” “continued,” “constant,” “[be] steadfast.”<\/p>\n<p>This persistent patience is called for in prayer (Lk 18:1-8; Col 4:2); in well doing (Rom 2:7; Gal 6:9); in Christian teaching (Acts 2:42; 2 Tm 3:14); in affliction (2 Thes 1:4); in grace (Acts 13:43; 2 Cor 6:1); in faith (Acts 14:22; Col 1:23); in divine love (Jn 15:9; Jude 1:21); in standing firm (1 Cor 16:13; 2 Thes 2:15); in abiding in Christ (Jn 15:4-10; 1 Jn 2:28); in running with patience (Heb 6:12; 12:1); in not falling away (Heb 3:12; 4:1-10); and in being zealous to confirm our call and election (2 Pt 1:10).<\/p>\n<p>The failure in perseverance of Judas (Jn 6:71), Demas (2 Tm 4:10), and Hymenaeus (2 Tm 2:17) must be kept in mind, as well as the dread possibility of neglecting so great a salvation (Heb 2:3), being disqualified (1 Cor 9:27), falling while we think we stand (1 Cor 10:12), and committing apostasy (Heb 6:1-8). For, as Jesus said, “He who endures to the end will be saved” (Mt 10:22; 24:13). Such extraordinary emphasis cannot be accidental. The pressures of pagan society, the danger of persecution, emotional reaction after a wonderful initial experience, and the apparent implication of “instant salvation,” made it imperative for Christians to understand that by their endurance they would inherit eternal salvation (Lk 21:19; Rom 5:3; Col 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>Yet Scripture never implies that perseverance depends entirely upon human effort. In the OT, the redeeming purpose of God is unswerving; God’s covenant stands, though it needs to be renewed (Jer 31:31-34). Divine love (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hesed<\/span>) connotes changeless loyalty; God “will never fail nor forsake” for “his own name’s sake.” The NT assurance is that Christ will raise his own at the last day—none shall pluck them from his hand or the Father’s. Christ will keep us from falling. God is faithful; he works in us to will and work for his good pleasure, and will not allow us to be tempted beyond our strength. Nothing, in heaven or earth, present or future, shall separate us from divine love. We are already sealed by the Holy Spirit as a guarantee of eternal salvation, and we are kept by the power of God unto a salvation yet to be revealed.<\/p>\n<p>The scriptural tension between exhortation to perseverance and assurance of salvation has given rise to much debate. The intellectual paradox is resolved only in spiritual experience.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Assurance; Backsliding.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PERSEVERANCE<\/h3>\n<p>Action or condition of steadfastness. OT Israel waited generations for fulfillment of promises that many believers never lived to see (Heb 11:1, 13, 21-22, 39). The promise to Abraham sustained hope for centuries before Canaan was possessed. The lesson of the wilderness journey, when the waning of initial zeal prevented the people from entering the Promised Land, was never forgotten (3:16-19). Prophets looked constantly beyond failure and tragedy to distant horizons, and they nourished a patient faith (Jer 32:1-15; Hos 3:4-5; Jl 2:28-29; Hb 2:1-3; Dn 12:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>The NT everywhere urges similar perseverance. Among several Greek expressions, the usual word, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">proskartereo<\/span><em>,<\/em> has the root meaning “to attend continually, adhere steadfastly” (Mk 3:9; Acts 8:13; 10:7; Rom 13:6), and is variously translated “devoted,” “continued,” “constant,” “[be] steadfast.”<\/p>\n<p>This persistent patience is called for in prayer (Lk 18:1-8; Col 4:2); in well doing (Rom 2:7; Gal 6:9); in Christian teaching (Acts 2:42; 2 Tm 3:14); in affliction (2 Thes 1:4); in grace (Acts 13:43; 2 Cor 6:1); in faith (Acts 14:22; Col 1:23); in divine love (Jn 15:9; Jude 1:21); in standing firm (1 Cor 16:13; 2 Thes 2:15); in abiding in Christ (Jn 15:4-10; 1 Jn 2:28); in running with patience (Heb 6:12; 12:1); in not falling away (Heb 3:12; 4:1-10); and in being zealous to confirm our call and election (2 Pt 1:10).<\/p>\n<p>The failure in perseverance of Judas (Jn 6:71), Demas (2 Tm 4:10), and Hymenaeus (2 Tm 2:17) must be kept in mind, as well as the dread possibility of neglecting so great a salvation (Heb 2:3), being disqualified (1 Cor 9:27), falling while we think we stand (1 Cor 10:12), and committing apostasy (Heb 6:1-8). For, as Jesus said, “He who endures to the end will be saved” (Mt 10:22; 24:13). Such extraordinary emphasis cannot be accidental. The pressures of pagan society, the danger of persecution, emotional reaction after a wonderful initial experience, and the apparent implication of “instant salvation,” made it imperative for Christians to understand that by their endurance they would inherit eternal salvation (Lk 21:19; Rom 5:3; Col 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>Yet Scripture never implies that perseverance depends entirely upon human effort. In the OT, the redeeming purpose of God is unswerving; God’s covenant stands, though it needs to be renewed (Jer 31:31-34). Divine love (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hesed<\/span>) connotes changeless loyalty; God “will never fail nor forsake” for “his own name’s sake.” The NT assurance is that Christ will raise his own at the last day—none shall pluck them from his hand or the Father’s. Christ will keep us from falling. God is faithful; he works in us to will and work for his good pleasure, and will not allow us to be tempted beyond our strength. Nothing, in heaven or earth, present or future, shall separate us from divine love. We are already sealed by the Holy Spirit as a guarantee of eternal salvation, and we are kept by the power of God unto a salvation yet to be revealed.<\/p>\n<p>The scriptural tension between exhortation to perseverance and assurance of salvation has given rise to much debate. The intellectual paradox is resolved only in spiritual experience.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Assurance; Backsliding.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PERSEVERANCE Action or condition of steadfastness. OT Israel waited generations for fulfillment of promises that many believers never lived to see (Heb 11:1, 13, 21-22, 39). The promise to Abraham sustained hope for centuries before Canaan was possessed. The lesson of the wilderness journey, when the waning of initial zeal prevented the people from entering the Promised Land, was never forgotten (3:16-19). Prophets looked constantly beyond failure and tragedy to distant horizons, and they nou...","summary_en":"PERSEVERANCE Action or condition of steadfastness. OT Israel waited generations for fulfillment of promises that many believers never lived to see (Heb 11:1, 13, 21-22, 39). The promise to Abraham sustained hope for centuries before Canaan was possessed. The lesson of the wilderness journey, when the waning of initial zeal prevented the people from entering the Promised Land, was never forgotten (3:16-19). Prophets looked constantly beyond failure and tragedy to distant horizons, and they nou...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35453,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Simon","title_en":"Simon","content_ro":"<h3>SIMON<\/h3>\n<p>Greek form of a Hebrew\/Aramaic name meaning “God has heard.” Nine men in the NT had this name:<\/p>\n<p>1. Son of Jona (Mt 16:17) or John (Jn 1:42), Andrew’s brother (v 40), and surnamed Cephas and Peter (respectively Aramaic and Greek, for “rock,” v 42) by Jesus. A fisherman of Bethsaida (Mk 1:16; Jn 1:44), he became an apostle of Jesus and author of two NT letters bearing his name. <em>See<\/em> Peter, The Apostle.<\/p>\n<li>2. Brother of Jesus, named with other brothers, James, Joses or Joseph, and Judas (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3).<\/li>\n<li>3. Leper, perhaps cured by Jesus, in whose house at Bethany Jesus and his disciples were eating when a woman poured an alabaster flask of costly ointment on the Lord’s head. Over the disciples’ objections against the waste of what could have been sold to support the poor, Jesus commended the act as a wonderful thing (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9). From John 12:1-8 it appears that Simon’s house was also the house of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus, but their relationship to Simon is uncertain.<\/li>\n<li>4. Man of Cyrene, a district of North Africa, whom the Romans forced to carry Jesus’ cross (Mt 27:32; Mk 15:21; Lk 23:26). He was the father of Alexander and Rufus (Mk 15:21; cf. Rom 16:13).<\/li>\n<li>5. Apostle of Jesus called a Zealot (Lk 6:15), presumably because of prior association either with the party of political extremists by that name, who adopted terrorism to oppose the Roman occupation of Palestine, or with one of a number of Jewish groups noted for their zeal for the law. In Matthew 10:4 and Mark 3:18 he is designated the “Cananaean” (<span>rsv<\/span>)—from the Aramaic word for “zealot.” He is mentioned again in Acts 1:13 as one of the 11 apostles in Jerusalem after Jesus’ ascension. Otherwise, the NT is silent about him.<\/li>\n<li>6. Pharisee whose treatment of Jesus evoked the parable of the two debtors (Lk 7:36-50). He invited Jesus to eat at his house but withheld courtesies customary for guests and disapproved of Jesus’ acceptance of a “sinner” woman who wet the Lord’s feet with her tears, dried them with her hair, and anointed them with ointment from an alabaster flask. Jesus’ parable contrasted the woman’s act of loving and repentant faith with Simon’s unloving and self-righteous skepticism.<\/li>\n<li>7. Father of Judas Iscariot, the disciple who betrayed Jesus in Gethsemane (Jn 6:71; 13:2, 26).<\/li>\n<li>8. Magician (often called Simon Magus) of great repute in Samaria. Impressed by the signs and miracles performed by Philip the deacon-become-evangelist, he joined the crowd of baptized believers. He offered Peter and John money in exchange for the gift of the Holy Spirit, provoking Peter’s emphatic rebuke (Acts 8:9-24). From the association of this incident with his name, the English word “simony” is derived; it denotes the sale or purchase of church positions, or any profiteering from sacred things.<\/li>\n<li>9. Tanner of Joppa. Peter lodged at his house for many days (Acts 9:43; 10:6, 17, 32). On Simon’s housetop, Peter experienced the vision of a great sheet let down from heaven, containing animals and birds prohibited as food in Jewish law (10:15). Peter later recognized this vision as his preparation for consenting to preach the gospel to the Gentiles (vv 28-29).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>SIMON<\/h3>\n<p>Greek form of a Hebrew\/Aramaic name meaning “God has heard.” Nine men in the NT had this name:<\/p>\n<p>1. Son of Jona (Mt 16:17) or John (Jn 1:42), Andrew’s brother (v 40), and surnamed Cephas and Peter (respectively Aramaic and Greek, for “rock,” v 42) by Jesus. A fisherman of Bethsaida (Mk 1:16; Jn 1:44), he became an apostle of Jesus and author of two NT letters bearing his name. <em>See<\/em> Peter, The Apostle.<\/p>\n<li>2. Brother of Jesus, named with other brothers, James, Joses or Joseph, and Judas (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3).<\/li>\n<li>3. Leper, perhaps cured by Jesus, in whose house at Bethany Jesus and his disciples were eating when a woman poured an alabaster flask of costly ointment on the Lord’s head. Over the disciples’ objections against the waste of what could have been sold to support the poor, Jesus commended the act as a wonderful thing (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9). From John 12:1-8 it appears that Simon’s house was also the house of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus, but their relationship to Simon is uncertain.<\/li>\n<li>4. Man of Cyrene, a district of North Africa, whom the Romans forced to carry Jesus’ cross (Mt 27:32; Mk 15:21; Lk 23:26). He was the father of Alexander and Rufus (Mk 15:21; cf. Rom 16:13).<\/li>\n<li>5. Apostle of Jesus called a Zealot (Lk 6:15), presumably because of prior association either with the party of political extremists by that name, who adopted terrorism to oppose the Roman occupation of Palestine, or with one of a number of Jewish groups noted for their zeal for the law. In Matthew 10:4 and Mark 3:18 he is designated the “Cananaean” (<span>rsv<\/span>)—from the Aramaic word for “zealot.” He is mentioned again in Acts 1:13 as one of the 11 apostles in Jerusalem after Jesus’ ascension. Otherwise, the NT is silent about him.<\/li>\n<li>6. Pharisee whose treatment of Jesus evoked the parable of the two debtors (Lk 7:36-50). He invited Jesus to eat at his house but withheld courtesies customary for guests and disapproved of Jesus’ acceptance of a “sinner” woman who wet the Lord’s feet with her tears, dried them with her hair, and anointed them with ointment from an alabaster flask. Jesus’ parable contrasted the woman’s act of loving and repentant faith with Simon’s unloving and self-righteous skepticism.<\/li>\n<li>7. Father of Judas Iscariot, the disciple who betrayed Jesus in Gethsemane (Jn 6:71; 13:2, 26).<\/li>\n<li>8. Magician (often called Simon Magus) of great repute in Samaria. Impressed by the signs and miracles performed by Philip the deacon-become-evangelist, he joined the crowd of baptized believers. He offered Peter and John money in exchange for the gift of the Holy Spirit, provoking Peter’s emphatic rebuke (Acts 8:9-24). From the association of this incident with his name, the English word “simony” is derived; it denotes the sale or purchase of church positions, or any profiteering from sacred things.<\/li>\n<li>9. Tanner of Joppa. Peter lodged at his house for many days (Acts 9:43; 10:6, 17, 32). On Simon’s housetop, Peter experienced the vision of a great sheet let down from heaven, containing animals and birds prohibited as food in Jewish law (10:15). Peter later recognized this vision as his preparation for consenting to preach the gospel to the Gentiles (vv 28-29).<\/li>","summary_ro":"SIMON Greek form of a Hebrew\/Aramaic name meaning “God has heard.” Nine men in the NT had this name: 1. Son of Jona (Mt 16:17) or John (Jn 1:42), Andrew’s brother (v 40), and surnamed Cephas and Peter (respectively Aramaic and Greek, for “rock,” v 42) by Jesus. A fisherman of Bethsaida (Mk 1:16; Jn 1:44), he became an apostle of Jesus and author of two NT letters bearing his name. See Peter, The Apostle. 2. Brother of Jesus, named with other brothers, James, Joses or Joseph, and Judas (Mt 13:...","summary_en":"SIMON Greek form of a Hebrew\/Aramaic name meaning “God has heard.” Nine men in the NT had this name: 1. Son of Jona (Mt 16:17) or John (Jn 1:42), Andrew’s brother (v 40), and surnamed Cephas and Peter (respectively Aramaic and Greek, for “rock,” v 42) by Jesus. A fisherman of Bethsaida (Mk 1:16; Jn 1:44), he became an apostle of Jesus and author of two NT letters bearing his name. See Peter, The Apostle. 2. Brother of Jesus, named with other brothers, James, Joses or Joseph, and Judas (Mt 13:...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}]},"labels":{"article":"Articol","map":"Hartă","chart":"Diagramă","textbox":"Notă explicativă","picture":"Imagine","profile":"Profil","study_note":"Notă de studiu","theme_note":"Temă biblică"},"icons":{"article":"📖","map":"🗺️","chart":"📊","textbox":"💡","picture":"🖼️","profile":"👤","study_note":"📝","theme_note":"🎯"},"typeColors":{"article":"#d4af37","map":"#2d7d46","chart":"#3b82f6","textbox":"#8b5cf6","picture":"#ec4899","profile":"#f59e0b","study_note":"#06b6d4","theme_note":"#ef4444"}}
🔍
Niciun rezultat
Nu am găsit versete care să conțină textul căutat.
Ioan 6
📘 Info carte
Se încarcă...
📖 Resurse
Muzică de relaxareSelectează o piesă
0:00
Redare audio
0 piese
🍪 Folosim cookie-uri
Folosim cookie-uri esențiale pentru funcționarea platformei și cookie-uri de analiză pentru a îmbunătăți experiența ta.
Află mai multe
✝️
Logosasistentul Biserica Online
✝️
Bine ai venit! 👋
Sunt Logos, prietenul tău spiritual. Începe conversația — te ascult cu drag! ✨