Citește Biblia

{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":19480,"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":24755,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of Matthew","title_en":"Gospel of Matthew","content_ro":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","summary_en":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":36855,"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}],"2":[{"id":42414,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70040,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97666,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125292,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11832,"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":21891,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Kingdom of Heaven Kingdom of God","title_en":"Kingdom of Heaven Kingdom of God","content_ro":"<h3>KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>• In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughout Galilee teaching in the synagogues, preaching everywhere the Good News about the Kingdom” (Mt 4:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Sermon on the Mount is concerned with the righteousness that qualifies people to enter the kingdom of God (5:20). The collection of parables in Matthew 13 and Mark 4 illustrate the “mystery” of the kingdom of God (Mt 13:11; Mk 4:11). The establishment of the Lord’s Supper looks forward to the establishment of the kingdom of God (Mt 26:29; Mk 14:25).<\/p>\n<p>The NT reports two different forms of the expression: “the kingdom of God” and “the kingdom of the heavens.” The latter is found only in Matthew, but Matthew also has “the kingdom of God” four times (Mt 12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43). “The kingdom of heaven” is a Semitic phrase that would have been meaningful to Jews but not to Greeks. The Jews, out of reverence for God, avoided uttering the divine name, and contemporary literature gives examples of substituting the word “heaven” for God (1 Macc 3:18, 50; 4:10; see Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>The key to an understanding of the kingdom of God is that the basic meaning of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span><em>,<\/em> as also of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>,<\/em> is rule, reign, dominion. We frequently find in the OT the expression “in the year of the kingdom of . . . ,” meaning in the year of the reign of a given king (e.g., 1 Chr 26:31; 2 Chr 3:2; 15:10; Ezr 7:1; 8:1; Est 2:16; Jer 10:7; 52:31). When we read that Solomon’s kingdom was firmly established (1 Kgs 2:12), we are to understand that his authority to reign was settled. To “turn the kingdom of Saul over to [David]” (1 Chr 12:23, <span>kjv<\/span>) indicates that the authority that had been Saul’s was given to David. As a result of having received legal authority, David became king. This abstract idea of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is evident when it is found in parallelisms with such ideas as power, might, glory, and dominion (Dn 4:34; 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>When <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is used of God, it almost always refers to his authority or to his rule as the heavenly King. “They will talk together about the glory of your kingdom; they will celebrate examples of your power. . . . For your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. You rule generation after generation” (Ps 145:11, 13, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Further, if a king rules, there must be a realm or sphere over which he reigns. This is also called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>.<\/em> “So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet, for his God gave him rest round about” (2 Chr 20:30, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Est 3:6; Jer 10:7; Dn 9:1; 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>This same twofold use of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> is found in the NT. In fact, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> could be translated by the expression “kingly power” in Luke 23:42 (<span>niv<\/span> mg) and by “kingship” in John 18:36. When a nobleman went into a far country to get a “kingdom” (Luke 19:12, <span>nasb<\/span>) he went to the governing authority to get an appointment as king. When Jesus said, “My kingship is not of this world” (Jn 18:36, <span>rsv<\/span>), he did not mean to say that his rule has nothing to do with the world but rather that his kingship—his dominion—does not come from man but from God. Therefore, he rejects the use of worldly fighting to gain his ends.<\/p>\n<p>This central meaning of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> makes it easy to understand many sayings in the Gospels. In the Lord’s Prayer the petition “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10) is a prayer for God to manifest his reign so that his will may be done on earth as it is in heaven. When we read that we are to “receive the kingdom of God like a child” (Mk 10:15, <span>rsv<\/span>), we must open our hearts and lives to the rule of God.<\/p>\n<p>Also in the NT are sayings about being <em>in<\/em> the kingdom or of <em>entering<\/em> the kingdom (Mt 8:11; Mk 9:47; 10:23-25; Lk 13:28). There is no philological or theological objection to understanding “the kingdom of God” first as the divine reign or rule and second as the sphere of blessing in which that reign is experienced.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentBackground\">Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>The expression “the kingdom of God” is not found in the OT, but the idea appears throughout the prophets. God is frequently spoken of as the King, both of Israel (Ex 15:18; Nm 23:21; Dt 33:5; Is 43:15) and of all the earth (2 Kgs 19:15; Pss 29:10; 47:2; 93:1-2; 96:10; 97:1-9; 99:1-4; 145:11-13; Is 6:5; Jer 46:18). Although God is not the earthly King of Israel, other references speak of a day when God shall become King and shall rule over his people (Is 24:23; 33:22; 52:7; Ob 1:21; Zep 3:15; Zec 14:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>This brief summary of God’s kingship provides the outline for the entire OT concept. While God is King over all the earth, he is in a special way King over his people, Israel. God’s rule is therefore something realized in Israel’s history. However, it is only partially and imperfectly realized. Israel again and again rebelled against the divine sovereignty. Furthermore, Israel was constantly plagued by wars with its pagan neighbors in which it was not always victorious. Again, there are evils in nature and the physical world that often bring suffering to God’s people. Therefore, the prophets look forward to a day when God’s rule will be fully experienced, not by Israel alone, but by all the world. The main emphasis of the prophets is on hope, the establishing of God’s perfect rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets describe the final establishment of God’s kingdom in terms of a theophany—a divine visitation (Mi 1:3-4). Zechariah foresees a “Day of the Lord” when all nations will be gathered in battle against Jerusalem, when the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations (Zec 14:3, 5). Israel will be visited by the Lord (Is 29:6) and delivered from its enemies (35:4; 59:20). God’s coming will also mean judgment (2:21; 26:21). This final coming of God will mean the salvation of the Gentiles as well as of Israel (Zec 2:10-11; cf. Is 66:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>Behind this language is a distinct theology of “the God who comes.” It is a fact widely recognized in contemporary OT theology that the God of the OT is not a nature god, like the gods of other peoples, but a God of history—a God who visits his people in history to bless or to judge them. God visited Israel in Egypt to deliver them from bondage and to constitute them as his people. The rescue from Egypt was not merely an act of deliverance; it was an act through which God made himself known and through which Israel was to know and serve him.<\/p>\n<p>Because God has visited his people again and again in their history, he must finally come to them in the future to judge wickedness and to establish his kingdom. Israel’s hope is thus rooted in history, or rather in the God who works in history. God will finally break into history in a glorious theophany to establish his rule in all the earth. The source of the kingdom is not history itself but God.<\/p>\n<p>While the prophets visualize the kingdom as coming from God, the kingdom is always on earth. The divine irruption into the natural order is not designed to accomplish its destruction but to make way for a new, perfect order arising out of the old, imperfect one. The prophets do not present a single consistent picture of the new order. Sometimes the new order is described very much in this-worldly terms. “The terraced vineyards on the hills of Israel will drip with sweet wine” (Am 9:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). On the other hand, God will create new heavens and a new earth (Is 65:17; 66:22), where there will be untroubled joy, prosperity, peace, and righteousness. The final visitation of God will mean the redemption of the world, for a redeemed earth is the scene of the kingdom of God. The prophets look forward again and again to the deliverance of creation “from the bondage to decay.” The description is often couched in simple physical terms. The wilderness will become fruitful (32:15); the desert will blossom (35:2); sorrow and sighing will flee away (v 10). The burning sands will be cooled and the dry places become springs of water (v 7); peace will return to the animal world so that all injury and destruction are done away with (11:6). All this results because the earth becomes full of the knowledge of God (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Such language is not mere poetry but reflects a profound theology of creation. Humans as creatures were made to dwell on the earth, and the earth shares in human destiny. The main point is that creation as such is good and not a hindrance to true spirituality, as was often true in Greek thought. Redemption always includes redemption of the earth, which then becomes the blessed environment God intended it to be. Salvation does not mean deliverance from creaturehood, for this is not an evil thing but an essential and permanent element of true, human existence. Salvation does not mean escape from bodily creaturely existence, as in some Greek thought. On the contrary, ultimate redemption will mean the redemption of the whole person. The emergence of the doctrine of bodily resurrection is a reflection of this theology of creaturehood. The corollary of this is that creation in its entirety must share in the blessing of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>A distinctive element in prophetic eschatology is the tension between history and eschatology. That is, as the prophets looked into the future, they saw an immediate historical judgment as well as a more remote eschatological visitation. For Amos, the Day of the Lord is both the immediate judgment of Israel by the Assyrians and a final eschatological salvation. Joel sees an imminent historical visitation of drought and locusts, but beyond this he sees the eschatological Day of the Lord. Zephaniah sees an imminent Day of the Lord in some undesignated historical visitation (Zep 1:2-18), but beyond it he sees the salvation of the Gentiles (3:9). The same God who acts in history to bless and judge his people will act at the end of history in an eschatological act of judgment and salvation. The prophets do not sharply distinguish between these two days, for it is one and the same God who is concerned to judge and save his people.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological hope of the prophets is always an ethical hope. That is to say, the prophets are not interested in the future for its own sake but for the impact of the future on the present. The prophetic predictions were given that, in light of future judgment and salvation, Israel might be confronted in the present by the will of God. “Prepare to meet your God as he comes in judgment, you people of Israel” (Am 4:12, <span>nlt<\/span>) might well be taken as the keynote of all the prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom of God embodied the same contrast between the present order and the future age as that of the prophets, and he expressed it in the idiom “this age and the age to come.” This fact is obscured in the <span>kjv<\/span>, which translates the word for “age” by “world.” These are, however, two different concepts. A rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). The context makes it clear that he was asking about eschatological life—the life of the resurrection (Dn 12:2). Jesus speaks of the difficulty of entering the kingdom of God. (The parallel passage in Matthew 19:23-24 has both “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven,” proving that they are interchangeable terms.) In their reaction the disciples ask, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus’ answer contrasts the lot of his disciples “in this time” with the “age to come” (Mk 10:29-30) when they would inherit eternal life. It is clear from this passage that in some sense the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, salvation, and eternal life all belong to the age to come. So far as this saying is concerned, God’s people will not experience eternal life until they do so in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew alone records the expression “the close of the age.” This age will be terminated by the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 24:3) and by the judgment of humanity (13:39-42). Then the righteous will be separated from the wicked (v 49). The same expression occurs in the promise of the risen Jesus assuring his disciples of his presence until the consummation of the age (28:20). It follows that if this age is to come to its consummation, it must be followed by another age—the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological kingdom will be inaugurated by an apocalyptic event—the glorious coming of the Son of Man. This is made clear by two of the parables about the kingdom of God. In the parable of the tares, “the Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire” (Mt 13:41-42, <span>rsv<\/span>). The parable of the sheep and goats reflects the same eschatology. When the Son of Man comes in his glory, he will sit on his glorious throne to judge the nations, separating the sheep from the goats. The righteous—the sheep—are to “inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world”; and entrance into the kingdom is synonymous with entrance into life (25:31-46, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological character of the kingdom of God is seen also in the other two parables of Matthew 25. “The kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom” (v 1, <span>rsv<\/span>). However, five of them were foolish and did not provide an adequate supply of oil for their lamps. Thus they were late for the wedding and were excluded from the wedding feast—a symbol of the eschatological kingdom—while those properly prepared entered the kingdom. In the same way the two faithful servants who had been “faithful over a little” were granted to “enter into the joy of your master” (vv 21, 23), while the unfaithful servant was excluded from the kingdom and cast into outer darkness.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus almost never showed any interest in descriptions of the eschatological kingdom, but it is clear that its coming was constantly in his thoughts. The pure in heart will see God (Mt 5:8). The harvest will take place and the grain will be gathered into the barn (13:30, 39; Mk 4:29). Jesus frequently used the metaphor of a feast or table fellowship to describe life in the eschatological kingdom. He will drink wine again with his disciples in the kingdom of God. They will eat and drink at Jesus’ table in the kingdom (Lk 22:30). People will be gathered from all corners of the earth to sit at a table with the OT saints (Mt 8:11-12; Lk 13:29). The consummation is likened to a wedding feast (Mt 22:1-14) and a banquet (Lk 14:16-24). All of these metaphors picture the restoration of communion between God and people, a union that had been broken by sin.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the sayings cited to illustrate the future character of the kingdom, “kingdom” refers to the eschatological order—the eschaton, the age to come. However, when Jesus taught his disciples to pray “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10), he was not referring to the new eschatological order; he was referring to the kingdom as God’s kingly rule, his reign. It is a prayer that God will effectively establish his sovereign rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>In his teaching about the kingdom of God as the apocalyptic consummation, Jesus does not differ essentially from the OT prophets. The most distinctive element in Jesus’ teaching—indeed, the fact that characterizes his entire mission and message—is the fact that in some real sense of the word, the kingdom of God has come in history in an utterly unexpected way. This sets Jesus’ teaching apart from all contemporary Jewish thought.<\/p>\n<p>This is seen first of all in his repeated teaching that his mission is a fulfillment of the OT messianic prophets. Mark summarizes Jesus’ message with the words “The Kingdom of God is near! Turn from your sins and believe this Good News!” (Mk 1:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). This saying can have one of two meanings. It may refer to the imminent coming of the apocalyptic kingdom. Matthew summarizes the message of John the Baptist with nearly the same words: “Turn from your sins and turn to God, because the Kingdom of Heaven is near” (Mt 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Baptist expounds what he means by the approach of the kingdom of God: “He is ready to separate the chaff from the grain with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, storing the grain in his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). John proclaimed an apocalyptic act; “unquenchable fire” can mean no strictly historical event but only an apocalyptic judgment. John expected Jesus to be the one in whom the cosmic event expected by the prophets would be carried out.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that this was also Jesus’ meaning. However, another interpretation is possible that is better supported by the actual course of his mission: “The time is fulfilled.” The messianic promises of the prophets were not only about to be fulfilled; they were actually in process of fulfillment in his mission. In Jesus, God was visiting his people. The hope of the prophets in some real sense was being realized.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of this can be seen in Luke’s introduction of Jesus’ ministry. Luke selects an event that occurred in Nazareth later in Jesus’ ministry (Lk 4:16-21) and places it at the beginning of his Gospel in order to sound this note of fulfillment. Jesus read from Isaiah a promise that looked forward to the messianic salvation: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he has appointed me to preach Good News to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released, that the blind will see, that the downtrodden will be freed from their oppressors, and that the time of the Lord’s favor has come” (vv 18-19, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then Jesus astonished his audience by the assertion “This Scripture has come true today before your very eyes!” (v 21, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Here was an amazing claim. John the Baptist had announced an apocalyptic visitation of God that would mean the fulfillment of the eschatological hope and the consummation of the messianic age. Jesus proclaimed that the messianic promise was actually being fulfilled in his person. This is no apocalyptic kingdom but a present salvation. In these words Jesus did not proclaim the imminence of the apocalyptic kingdom. Rather, he boldly announced that the kingdom of God had come. The presence of the kingdom was a happening, an event, the gracious action of God. This was no new theology or new idea or new promise; it was a new event in history.<\/p>\n<p>The note of fulfillment is again sounded in Jesus’ answer to the question about fasting. “Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can’t fast while they are with the groom” (Mk 2:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). The marriage feast had become a metaphor in Judaism for the messianic consummation. In these words Jesus announced the presence of the messianic time of salvation. It would be a contradiction in terms for the disciples to fast when they were enjoying the blessings of the messianic age. The time of fulfillment had come.<\/p>\n<p>A saying found in different contexts in Matthew and Luke touches this central note of the fulfillment in history of the OT hope: “Blessed are the eyes which see what you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it” (Lk 10:23-24, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 13:16-17). Both Matthew and Luke associate this saying with the kingdom of God, and both agree that the hope of former generations has become an object of experience. Many prophets and kings looked forward to something, but they looked in vain, for it did not come to them. What they longed for has now come, and this can be nothing less than the promised messianic salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Fulfillment in history is again asserted in Jesus’ answer to John’s question about the one who is to come (Mt 11:2-3). “The deeds of the Christ” (Messiah) were not the deeds John had announced. Wicked rulers like Herod were not being judged in fire. Instead, Jesus was helping people, not bringing an apocalyptic kingdom. Jesus replied in words that echo the promise of the messianic salvation in Isaiah 35:5-6: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Mt 11:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). In these words Jesus claimed that the blessings of the messianic salvation are present. There was indeed reason for John’s perplexity, for the fulfillment was not taking place along expected lines. The apocalyptic consummation did not appear to be on the horizon. The point of Jesus’ answer was that fulfillment was taking place without the eschatological consummation. Therefore, Jesus pronounced a special blessing upon those who were not offended by the character of the messianic fulfillment (v 6). The fulfillment was indeed taking place, but not the apocalyptic consummation.<\/p>\n<p>The most unambiguous statement of the presence of the kingdom is found in the words about the binding of Satan. One of Jesus’ most characteristic acts was the exorcism of demons—deliverance from satanic power. The Pharisees admitted his power but attributed it to Satan. Jesus replied, “If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? . . . But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God is come upon you” (Mt 12:26, 28, <span>rsv<\/span>). Here the verb has the clear meaning “to come, to arrive” (cf. Rom 9:30; 2 Cor 10:14; Phil 3:16). Here is a clear affirmation that the kingdom of God has come among men.<\/p>\n<p>In explanation Jesus said, “Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house” (Mt 12:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). The strong man is Satan; this “present evil age” (Gal 1:4) is his “house”; his “goods” are demon-possessed men and women. Jesus has invaded the strong man’s house to snatch away from him men and women whom he has in his power, and this is the work of the kingdom of God. The kingly reign of God has come into history in the person of Jesus before the apocalyptic consummation when Satan will be destroyed, to render Satan a preliminary defeat. Jesus has already “bound” Satan (i.e., curbed his power). This has been accomplished by the presence of the kingdom of God in the mission of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A similar saying is found in Luke 10:18. Jesus had sent a band of his disciples on a preaching mission. Like Jesus, they were to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom of God (Lk 10:9). They, too, were to exorcize demons. When they returned to Jesus to report their success, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>). This again is metaphorical language that asserts that in the mission of Jesus’ disciples, as well as in Jesus himself, Satan has fallen from his place of power. Both “binding” and “falling” are metaphors that describe the same truth: the victory of the kingdom of God over Satan.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the element that sets Jesus apart from the OT and from all of contemporary Judaism. The prophets conceived of the kingdom being established by a heavenly supernatural being (Dn 7) or ruled by a powerful Davidic messianic king (Is 9, 11). The fulfillment of the messianic hope is everywhere in the prophets an eschatological hope. The same is true of the Jewish writers who despaired of history and cast all hope into the future.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to all that had gone before him, Jesus proclaimed the kingdom of God as an event taking place in his own person and mission. God had again assumed the initiative; God was acting. No first-century Jew had any idea of the kingdom of God coming into history in the person of an ordinary man—a teacher who was meek and lowly.<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the kingdom is further seen in the fact that the rule of God, present in Jesus, is a gift to be received. This is also true of the kingdom in its eschatological consummation, where the kingdom is freely inherited by the righteous (Mt 25:34). In answer to the young man’s question about inheriting eternal life (Mk 10:17), Jesus spoke of entering the kingdom (vv 23-24) and receiving the gift of eternal life (v 30) as though they were synonymous. The kingdom is a gift that the Father is pleased to bestow upon the little flock of Jesus’ disciples (Lk 12:32).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s eschatological rule brings to his people the blessings of that kingdom, and if God’s kingdom is his rule invading history before the eschatological consummation, then we may expect God’s rule in the present to bring a preliminary blessing to his people. This fact is reflected in numerous sayings. The kingdom is something to be sought here and now (Mt 6:33) and to be received as children receive a gift (Mk 10:15; Lk 18:16-17). Although it is present in an unexpected form, the kingdom of God in Jesus’ person is like a hidden treasure or a pearl of great price whose possession outranks all other goods (Mt 13:44-46). The gift of the kingdom is also seen in that the deaf hear, the blind see, lepers are cleansed, and the poor have good news preached to them (11:5).<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>In the Gospel of John the concept of eternal life takes the place of the kingdom of God in Jesus’ teaching. The kingdom of God is mentioned twice (Jn 3:3, 5), and it is placed in connection with eternal life. The kingdom of God is here the eschatological kingdom, and eternal life is the life of the kingdom. Thus, as the kingdom of God in the synoptic Gospels is both future and present, so eternal life is both the life of the age to come (12:25) and also a present blessing (3:16, etc.).<\/p>\n<h5>Acts<\/h5>\n<p>In Acts it seems the earliest disciples generally failed to understand Jesus’ message about the kingdom of God as a present spiritual blessing. They gathered together to await the coming of the eschatological kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6). Acts relates that the disciples continued to preach the kingdom of God, but usually it is an eschatological blessing (8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). However, the last two references make the kingdom of God synonymous with the gospel about Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>One important theme in Acts is linked to that of the kingdom of God. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter announces that God has seated Jesus at his right hand in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1 (Acts 2:33-35). In the Psalms this is a prophecy of the enthronement of the Davidic king in Jerusalem. Peter asserts that this prophecy is now fulfilled in the heavenly reign of Jesus. Therefore, he has been made both Lord and Christ (Messiah). These are interchangeable terms, “Lord” meaning absolute sovereign, “Christ” meaning the messianic king.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>Paul carried further this theme of the heavenly rule of Christ, the anointed King. The kingdom is both an eschatological inheritance (1 Cor 6:9; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; 1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 1:5; 2 Tm 4:1, 18) and a present blessing into which believers now enter (Rom 14:17; Col 1:13). The key to this is the interchangeable character of lordship and messianic kingship. Jesus is now exalted as Lord over all (Phil 2:11), and even as his lordship is invisible, it will become manifest to all at his second coming. In the same way, he has been enthroned as messianic King by virtue of his resurrection and heavenly session, and he must reign as King until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:22). The last enemy to be destroyed is death.<\/p>\n<h5>Revelation<\/h5>\n<p>The central message of the Revelation to John is the consummation of God’s redemptive purpose, when the kingdom of this world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Revelation pictures the plight of a persecuted church in a hostile world, but it assures the church that Christ has already won a victory over the powers of evil (5:5), by virtue of which he can finally destroy them (19:11–20:14). Again, the last enemy to be destroyed is death (20:13-14). Revelation closes with a highly symbolic picture of the kingdom of God (chs 21–22) when God comes to dwell among his people, and “they shall see his face” (22:4). Thus the NT ends: divine order is restored to a disordered world. This is the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Teachings of; King; Parable.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>• In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughout Galilee teaching in the synagogues, preaching everywhere the Good News about the Kingdom” (Mt 4:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Sermon on the Mount is concerned with the righteousness that qualifies people to enter the kingdom of God (5:20). The collection of parables in Matthew 13 and Mark 4 illustrate the “mystery” of the kingdom of God (Mt 13:11; Mk 4:11). The establishment of the Lord’s Supper looks forward to the establishment of the kingdom of God (Mt 26:29; Mk 14:25).<\/p>\n<p>The NT reports two different forms of the expression: “the kingdom of God” and “the kingdom of the heavens.” The latter is found only in Matthew, but Matthew also has “the kingdom of God” four times (Mt 12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43). “The kingdom of heaven” is a Semitic phrase that would have been meaningful to Jews but not to Greeks. The Jews, out of reverence for God, avoided uttering the divine name, and contemporary literature gives examples of substituting the word “heaven” for God (1 Macc 3:18, 50; 4:10; see Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>The key to an understanding of the kingdom of God is that the basic meaning of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span><em>,<\/em> as also of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>,<\/em> is rule, reign, dominion. We frequently find in the OT the expression “in the year of the kingdom of . . . ,” meaning in the year of the reign of a given king (e.g., 1 Chr 26:31; 2 Chr 3:2; 15:10; Ezr 7:1; 8:1; Est 2:16; Jer 10:7; 52:31). When we read that Solomon’s kingdom was firmly established (1 Kgs 2:12), we are to understand that his authority to reign was settled. To “turn the kingdom of Saul over to [David]” (1 Chr 12:23, <span>kjv<\/span>) indicates that the authority that had been Saul’s was given to David. As a result of having received legal authority, David became king. This abstract idea of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is evident when it is found in parallelisms with such ideas as power, might, glory, and dominion (Dn 4:34; 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>When <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is used of God, it almost always refers to his authority or to his rule as the heavenly King. “They will talk together about the glory of your kingdom; they will celebrate examples of your power. . . . For your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. You rule generation after generation” (Ps 145:11, 13, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Further, if a king rules, there must be a realm or sphere over which he reigns. This is also called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>.<\/em> “So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet, for his God gave him rest round about” (2 Chr 20:30, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Est 3:6; Jer 10:7; Dn 9:1; 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>This same twofold use of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> is found in the NT. In fact, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> could be translated by the expression “kingly power” in Luke 23:42 (<span>niv<\/span> mg) and by “kingship” in John 18:36. When a nobleman went into a far country to get a “kingdom” (Luke 19:12, <span>nasb<\/span>) he went to the governing authority to get an appointment as king. When Jesus said, “My kingship is not of this world” (Jn 18:36, <span>rsv<\/span>), he did not mean to say that his rule has nothing to do with the world but rather that his kingship—his dominion—does not come from man but from God. Therefore, he rejects the use of worldly fighting to gain his ends.<\/p>\n<p>This central meaning of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> makes it easy to understand many sayings in the Gospels. In the Lord’s Prayer the petition “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10) is a prayer for God to manifest his reign so that his will may be done on earth as it is in heaven. When we read that we are to “receive the kingdom of God like a child” (Mk 10:15, <span>rsv<\/span>), we must open our hearts and lives to the rule of God.<\/p>\n<p>Also in the NT are sayings about being <em>in<\/em> the kingdom or of <em>entering<\/em> the kingdom (Mt 8:11; Mk 9:47; 10:23-25; Lk 13:28). There is no philological or theological objection to understanding “the kingdom of God” first as the divine reign or rule and second as the sphere of blessing in which that reign is experienced.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentBackground\">Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>The expression “the kingdom of God” is not found in the OT, but the idea appears throughout the prophets. God is frequently spoken of as the King, both of Israel (Ex 15:18; Nm 23:21; Dt 33:5; Is 43:15) and of all the earth (2 Kgs 19:15; Pss 29:10; 47:2; 93:1-2; 96:10; 97:1-9; 99:1-4; 145:11-13; Is 6:5; Jer 46:18). Although God is not the earthly King of Israel, other references speak of a day when God shall become King and shall rule over his people (Is 24:23; 33:22; 52:7; Ob 1:21; Zep 3:15; Zec 14:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>This brief summary of God’s kingship provides the outline for the entire OT concept. While God is King over all the earth, he is in a special way King over his people, Israel. God’s rule is therefore something realized in Israel’s history. However, it is only partially and imperfectly realized. Israel again and again rebelled against the divine sovereignty. Furthermore, Israel was constantly plagued by wars with its pagan neighbors in which it was not always victorious. Again, there are evils in nature and the physical world that often bring suffering to God’s people. Therefore, the prophets look forward to a day when God’s rule will be fully experienced, not by Israel alone, but by all the world. The main emphasis of the prophets is on hope, the establishing of God’s perfect rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets describe the final establishment of God’s kingdom in terms of a theophany—a divine visitation (Mi 1:3-4). Zechariah foresees a “Day of the Lord” when all nations will be gathered in battle against Jerusalem, when the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations (Zec 14:3, 5). Israel will be visited by the Lord (Is 29:6) and delivered from its enemies (35:4; 59:20). God’s coming will also mean judgment (2:21; 26:21). This final coming of God will mean the salvation of the Gentiles as well as of Israel (Zec 2:10-11; cf. Is 66:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>Behind this language is a distinct theology of “the God who comes.” It is a fact widely recognized in contemporary OT theology that the God of the OT is not a nature god, like the gods of other peoples, but a God of history—a God who visits his people in history to bless or to judge them. God visited Israel in Egypt to deliver them from bondage and to constitute them as his people. The rescue from Egypt was not merely an act of deliverance; it was an act through which God made himself known and through which Israel was to know and serve him.<\/p>\n<p>Because God has visited his people again and again in their history, he must finally come to them in the future to judge wickedness and to establish his kingdom. Israel’s hope is thus rooted in history, or rather in the God who works in history. God will finally break into history in a glorious theophany to establish his rule in all the earth. The source of the kingdom is not history itself but God.<\/p>\n<p>While the prophets visualize the kingdom as coming from God, the kingdom is always on earth. The divine irruption into the natural order is not designed to accomplish its destruction but to make way for a new, perfect order arising out of the old, imperfect one. The prophets do not present a single consistent picture of the new order. Sometimes the new order is described very much in this-worldly terms. “The terraced vineyards on the hills of Israel will drip with sweet wine” (Am 9:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). On the other hand, God will create new heavens and a new earth (Is 65:17; 66:22), where there will be untroubled joy, prosperity, peace, and righteousness. The final visitation of God will mean the redemption of the world, for a redeemed earth is the scene of the kingdom of God. The prophets look forward again and again to the deliverance of creation “from the bondage to decay.” The description is often couched in simple physical terms. The wilderness will become fruitful (32:15); the desert will blossom (35:2); sorrow and sighing will flee away (v 10). The burning sands will be cooled and the dry places become springs of water (v 7); peace will return to the animal world so that all injury and destruction are done away with (11:6). All this results because the earth becomes full of the knowledge of God (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Such language is not mere poetry but reflects a profound theology of creation. Humans as creatures were made to dwell on the earth, and the earth shares in human destiny. The main point is that creation as such is good and not a hindrance to true spirituality, as was often true in Greek thought. Redemption always includes redemption of the earth, which then becomes the blessed environment God intended it to be. Salvation does not mean deliverance from creaturehood, for this is not an evil thing but an essential and permanent element of true, human existence. Salvation does not mean escape from bodily creaturely existence, as in some Greek thought. On the contrary, ultimate redemption will mean the redemption of the whole person. The emergence of the doctrine of bodily resurrection is a reflection of this theology of creaturehood. The corollary of this is that creation in its entirety must share in the blessing of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>A distinctive element in prophetic eschatology is the tension between history and eschatology. That is, as the prophets looked into the future, they saw an immediate historical judgment as well as a more remote eschatological visitation. For Amos, the Day of the Lord is both the immediate judgment of Israel by the Assyrians and a final eschatological salvation. Joel sees an imminent historical visitation of drought and locusts, but beyond this he sees the eschatological Day of the Lord. Zephaniah sees an imminent Day of the Lord in some undesignated historical visitation (Zep 1:2-18), but beyond it he sees the salvation of the Gentiles (3:9). The same God who acts in history to bless and judge his people will act at the end of history in an eschatological act of judgment and salvation. The prophets do not sharply distinguish between these two days, for it is one and the same God who is concerned to judge and save his people.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological hope of the prophets is always an ethical hope. That is to say, the prophets are not interested in the future for its own sake but for the impact of the future on the present. The prophetic predictions were given that, in light of future judgment and salvation, Israel might be confronted in the present by the will of God. “Prepare to meet your God as he comes in judgment, you people of Israel” (Am 4:12, <span>nlt<\/span>) might well be taken as the keynote of all the prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom of God embodied the same contrast between the present order and the future age as that of the prophets, and he expressed it in the idiom “this age and the age to come.” This fact is obscured in the <span>kjv<\/span>, which translates the word for “age” by “world.” These are, however, two different concepts. A rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). The context makes it clear that he was asking about eschatological life—the life of the resurrection (Dn 12:2). Jesus speaks of the difficulty of entering the kingdom of God. (The parallel passage in Matthew 19:23-24 has both “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven,” proving that they are interchangeable terms.) In their reaction the disciples ask, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus’ answer contrasts the lot of his disciples “in this time” with the “age to come” (Mk 10:29-30) when they would inherit eternal life. It is clear from this passage that in some sense the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, salvation, and eternal life all belong to the age to come. So far as this saying is concerned, God’s people will not experience eternal life until they do so in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew alone records the expression “the close of the age.” This age will be terminated by the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 24:3) and by the judgment of humanity (13:39-42). Then the righteous will be separated from the wicked (v 49). The same expression occurs in the promise of the risen Jesus assuring his disciples of his presence until the consummation of the age (28:20). It follows that if this age is to come to its consummation, it must be followed by another age—the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological kingdom will be inaugurated by an apocalyptic event—the glorious coming of the Son of Man. This is made clear by two of the parables about the kingdom of God. In the parable of the tares, “the Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire” (Mt 13:41-42, <span>rsv<\/span>). The parable of the sheep and goats reflects the same eschatology. When the Son of Man comes in his glory, he will sit on his glorious throne to judge the nations, separating the sheep from the goats. The righteous—the sheep—are to “inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world”; and entrance into the kingdom is synonymous with entrance into life (25:31-46, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological character of the kingdom of God is seen also in the other two parables of Matthew 25. “The kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom” (v 1, <span>rsv<\/span>). However, five of them were foolish and did not provide an adequate supply of oil for their lamps. Thus they were late for the wedding and were excluded from the wedding feast—a symbol of the eschatological kingdom—while those properly prepared entered the kingdom. In the same way the two faithful servants who had been “faithful over a little” were granted to “enter into the joy of your master” (vv 21, 23), while the unfaithful servant was excluded from the kingdom and cast into outer darkness.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus almost never showed any interest in descriptions of the eschatological kingdom, but it is clear that its coming was constantly in his thoughts. The pure in heart will see God (Mt 5:8). The harvest will take place and the grain will be gathered into the barn (13:30, 39; Mk 4:29). Jesus frequently used the metaphor of a feast or table fellowship to describe life in the eschatological kingdom. He will drink wine again with his disciples in the kingdom of God. They will eat and drink at Jesus’ table in the kingdom (Lk 22:30). People will be gathered from all corners of the earth to sit at a table with the OT saints (Mt 8:11-12; Lk 13:29). The consummation is likened to a wedding feast (Mt 22:1-14) and a banquet (Lk 14:16-24). All of these metaphors picture the restoration of communion between God and people, a union that had been broken by sin.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the sayings cited to illustrate the future character of the kingdom, “kingdom” refers to the eschatological order—the eschaton, the age to come. However, when Jesus taught his disciples to pray “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10), he was not referring to the new eschatological order; he was referring to the kingdom as God’s kingly rule, his reign. It is a prayer that God will effectively establish his sovereign rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>In his teaching about the kingdom of God as the apocalyptic consummation, Jesus does not differ essentially from the OT prophets. The most distinctive element in Jesus’ teaching—indeed, the fact that characterizes his entire mission and message—is the fact that in some real sense of the word, the kingdom of God has come in history in an utterly unexpected way. This sets Jesus’ teaching apart from all contemporary Jewish thought.<\/p>\n<p>This is seen first of all in his repeated teaching that his mission is a fulfillment of the OT messianic prophets. Mark summarizes Jesus’ message with the words “The Kingdom of God is near! Turn from your sins and believe this Good News!” (Mk 1:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). This saying can have one of two meanings. It may refer to the imminent coming of the apocalyptic kingdom. Matthew summarizes the message of John the Baptist with nearly the same words: “Turn from your sins and turn to God, because the Kingdom of Heaven is near” (Mt 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Baptist expounds what he means by the approach of the kingdom of God: “He is ready to separate the chaff from the grain with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, storing the grain in his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). John proclaimed an apocalyptic act; “unquenchable fire” can mean no strictly historical event but only an apocalyptic judgment. John expected Jesus to be the one in whom the cosmic event expected by the prophets would be carried out.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that this was also Jesus’ meaning. However, another interpretation is possible that is better supported by the actual course of his mission: “The time is fulfilled.” The messianic promises of the prophets were not only about to be fulfilled; they were actually in process of fulfillment in his mission. In Jesus, God was visiting his people. The hope of the prophets in some real sense was being realized.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of this can be seen in Luke’s introduction of Jesus’ ministry. Luke selects an event that occurred in Nazareth later in Jesus’ ministry (Lk 4:16-21) and places it at the beginning of his Gospel in order to sound this note of fulfillment. Jesus read from Isaiah a promise that looked forward to the messianic salvation: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he has appointed me to preach Good News to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released, that the blind will see, that the downtrodden will be freed from their oppressors, and that the time of the Lord’s favor has come” (vv 18-19, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then Jesus astonished his audience by the assertion “This Scripture has come true today before your very eyes!” (v 21, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Here was an amazing claim. John the Baptist had announced an apocalyptic visitation of God that would mean the fulfillment of the eschatological hope and the consummation of the messianic age. Jesus proclaimed that the messianic promise was actually being fulfilled in his person. This is no apocalyptic kingdom but a present salvation. In these words Jesus did not proclaim the imminence of the apocalyptic kingdom. Rather, he boldly announced that the kingdom of God had come. The presence of the kingdom was a happening, an event, the gracious action of God. This was no new theology or new idea or new promise; it was a new event in history.<\/p>\n<p>The note of fulfillment is again sounded in Jesus’ answer to the question about fasting. “Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can’t fast while they are with the groom” (Mk 2:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). The marriage feast had become a metaphor in Judaism for the messianic consummation. In these words Jesus announced the presence of the messianic time of salvation. It would be a contradiction in terms for the disciples to fast when they were enjoying the blessings of the messianic age. The time of fulfillment had come.<\/p>\n<p>A saying found in different contexts in Matthew and Luke touches this central note of the fulfillment in history of the OT hope: “Blessed are the eyes which see what you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it” (Lk 10:23-24, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 13:16-17). Both Matthew and Luke associate this saying with the kingdom of God, and both agree that the hope of former generations has become an object of experience. Many prophets and kings looked forward to something, but they looked in vain, for it did not come to them. What they longed for has now come, and this can be nothing less than the promised messianic salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Fulfillment in history is again asserted in Jesus’ answer to John’s question about the one who is to come (Mt 11:2-3). “The deeds of the Christ” (Messiah) were not the deeds John had announced. Wicked rulers like Herod were not being judged in fire. Instead, Jesus was helping people, not bringing an apocalyptic kingdom. Jesus replied in words that echo the promise of the messianic salvation in Isaiah 35:5-6: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Mt 11:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). In these words Jesus claimed that the blessings of the messianic salvation are present. There was indeed reason for John’s perplexity, for the fulfillment was not taking place along expected lines. The apocalyptic consummation did not appear to be on the horizon. The point of Jesus’ answer was that fulfillment was taking place without the eschatological consummation. Therefore, Jesus pronounced a special blessing upon those who were not offended by the character of the messianic fulfillment (v 6). The fulfillment was indeed taking place, but not the apocalyptic consummation.<\/p>\n<p>The most unambiguous statement of the presence of the kingdom is found in the words about the binding of Satan. One of Jesus’ most characteristic acts was the exorcism of demons—deliverance from satanic power. The Pharisees admitted his power but attributed it to Satan. Jesus replied, “If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? . . . But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God is come upon you” (Mt 12:26, 28, <span>rsv<\/span>). Here the verb has the clear meaning “to come, to arrive” (cf. Rom 9:30; 2 Cor 10:14; Phil 3:16). Here is a clear affirmation that the kingdom of God has come among men.<\/p>\n<p>In explanation Jesus said, “Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house” (Mt 12:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). The strong man is Satan; this “present evil age” (Gal 1:4) is his “house”; his “goods” are demon-possessed men and women. Jesus has invaded the strong man’s house to snatch away from him men and women whom he has in his power, and this is the work of the kingdom of God. The kingly reign of God has come into history in the person of Jesus before the apocalyptic consummation when Satan will be destroyed, to render Satan a preliminary defeat. Jesus has already “bound” Satan (i.e., curbed his power). This has been accomplished by the presence of the kingdom of God in the mission of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A similar saying is found in Luke 10:18. Jesus had sent a band of his disciples on a preaching mission. Like Jesus, they were to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom of God (Lk 10:9). They, too, were to exorcize demons. When they returned to Jesus to report their success, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>). This again is metaphorical language that asserts that in the mission of Jesus’ disciples, as well as in Jesus himself, Satan has fallen from his place of power. Both “binding” and “falling” are metaphors that describe the same truth: the victory of the kingdom of God over Satan.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the element that sets Jesus apart from the OT and from all of contemporary Judaism. The prophets conceived of the kingdom being established by a heavenly supernatural being (Dn 7) or ruled by a powerful Davidic messianic king (Is 9, 11). The fulfillment of the messianic hope is everywhere in the prophets an eschatological hope. The same is true of the Jewish writers who despaired of history and cast all hope into the future.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to all that had gone before him, Jesus proclaimed the kingdom of God as an event taking place in his own person and mission. God had again assumed the initiative; God was acting. No first-century Jew had any idea of the kingdom of God coming into history in the person of an ordinary man—a teacher who was meek and lowly.<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the kingdom is further seen in the fact that the rule of God, present in Jesus, is a gift to be received. This is also true of the kingdom in its eschatological consummation, where the kingdom is freely inherited by the righteous (Mt 25:34). In answer to the young man’s question about inheriting eternal life (Mk 10:17), Jesus spoke of entering the kingdom (vv 23-24) and receiving the gift of eternal life (v 30) as though they were synonymous. The kingdom is a gift that the Father is pleased to bestow upon the little flock of Jesus’ disciples (Lk 12:32).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s eschatological rule brings to his people the blessings of that kingdom, and if God’s kingdom is his rule invading history before the eschatological consummation, then we may expect God’s rule in the present to bring a preliminary blessing to his people. This fact is reflected in numerous sayings. The kingdom is something to be sought here and now (Mt 6:33) and to be received as children receive a gift (Mk 10:15; Lk 18:16-17). Although it is present in an unexpected form, the kingdom of God in Jesus’ person is like a hidden treasure or a pearl of great price whose possession outranks all other goods (Mt 13:44-46). The gift of the kingdom is also seen in that the deaf hear, the blind see, lepers are cleansed, and the poor have good news preached to them (11:5).<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>In the Gospel of John the concept of eternal life takes the place of the kingdom of God in Jesus’ teaching. The kingdom of God is mentioned twice (Jn 3:3, 5), and it is placed in connection with eternal life. The kingdom of God is here the eschatological kingdom, and eternal life is the life of the kingdom. Thus, as the kingdom of God in the synoptic Gospels is both future and present, so eternal life is both the life of the age to come (12:25) and also a present blessing (3:16, etc.).<\/p>\n<h5>Acts<\/h5>\n<p>In Acts it seems the earliest disciples generally failed to understand Jesus’ message about the kingdom of God as a present spiritual blessing. They gathered together to await the coming of the eschatological kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6). Acts relates that the disciples continued to preach the kingdom of God, but usually it is an eschatological blessing (8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). However, the last two references make the kingdom of God synonymous with the gospel about Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>One important theme in Acts is linked to that of the kingdom of God. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter announces that God has seated Jesus at his right hand in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1 (Acts 2:33-35). In the Psalms this is a prophecy of the enthronement of the Davidic king in Jerusalem. Peter asserts that this prophecy is now fulfilled in the heavenly reign of Jesus. Therefore, he has been made both Lord and Christ (Messiah). These are interchangeable terms, “Lord” meaning absolute sovereign, “Christ” meaning the messianic king.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>Paul carried further this theme of the heavenly rule of Christ, the anointed King. The kingdom is both an eschatological inheritance (1 Cor 6:9; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; 1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 1:5; 2 Tm 4:1, 18) and a present blessing into which believers now enter (Rom 14:17; Col 1:13). The key to this is the interchangeable character of lordship and messianic kingship. Jesus is now exalted as Lord over all (Phil 2:11), and even as his lordship is invisible, it will become manifest to all at his second coming. In the same way, he has been enthroned as messianic King by virtue of his resurrection and heavenly session, and he must reign as King until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:22). The last enemy to be destroyed is death.<\/p>\n<h5>Revelation<\/h5>\n<p>The central message of the Revelation to John is the consummation of God’s redemptive purpose, when the kingdom of this world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Revelation pictures the plight of a persecuted church in a hostile world, but it assures the church that Christ has already won a victory over the powers of evil (5:5), by virtue of which he can finally destroy them (19:11–20:14). Again, the last enemy to be destroyed is death (20:13-14). Revelation closes with a highly symbolic picture of the kingdom of God (chs 21–22) when God comes to dwell among his people, and “they shall see his face” (22:4). Thus the NT ends: divine order is restored to a disordered world. This is the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Teachings of; King; Parable.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Preview • Introduction • Old Testament Background • In the New Testament Introduction According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughou...","summary_en":"KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Preview • Introduction • Old Testament Background • In the New Testament Introduction According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughou...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23565,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Love","title_en":"Love","content_ro":"<h3>LOVE<\/h3>\n<p>Prominent virtue in Christian theology and ethics. It is therefore important to understand clearly this exceedingly important term.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Sexual love <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ahabah<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">dod<\/span><em>)<\/em> is spoken of in the stories of Adam and Eve and of Jacob and Rachel, as well as in the Song of Songs. A higher form of love, involving loyalty, steadfastness, and kindness, is expressed by the Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hesed<\/span><em>,<\/em> which is sometimes rendered “loyalty” (2 Sm 22:26, <span>rsv<\/span>), but more often “steadfast love” or “loving-kindness.”<\/p>\n<p>The connotation of this significant word is clear in Hosea 2:19-20: “I will make you my wife forever, showing you righteousness and justice, unfailing love and compassion. I will be faithful to you and make you mine, and you will finally know me as <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>); in Job 6:14-15, where kindness is compared with treachery; and in 1 Samuel 20:8, which speaks of covenanted kindness. This unshakable, steadfast love of God is contrasted with the unpredictable, capricious moods of heathen deities. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Hesed<\/span> is not an emotional response to beauty, merit, or kindness but rather a moral attitude dedicated to another’s good, whether or not that other is lovable, worthy, or responsive (see Dt 7:7-9).<\/p>\n<p>This enduring loyalty, rooted in an unswerving purpose of good, could be stern, determined to discipline a wayward people, as several prophets warned. But God’s love does not change. Through exile and failure it persisted with infinite patience, neither condoning evil nor abandoning the evildoers. It has within it kindness, tenderness, and compassion (Pss 86:15; 103:1-18; 136; Hos 11:1-4), but its chief characteristic is an accepted moral obligation for another’s welfare.<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, response was expected. The Law enjoined wholehearted love and gratitude for God’s choosing and redeeming of Israel (Dt 6:20-25). This was to be shown in worship and especially in humane treatment of the poor, the defenseless, the resident alien, slaves, widows, and all suffering oppression and cruelty. Hosea similarly expected steadfast love among people to result from the steadfast love of God toward people (Hos 6:6; 7:1-7; 10:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Love for God and for “your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18) are thus linked in Israel’s law and prophecy. While much love of another kind lies within the OT, these are the major points: God’s loving initiative, the moral quality of love, and the close relationship between love for God with loving others.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Of the Greek words available to describe love, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eros<\/span> (sexual love) does not occur in the NT. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Phileo<\/span><em>,<\/em> connoting natural affection, occurs some 25 times, with <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">philadelphia<\/span> (brotherly love) five times, and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">philia<\/span> (friendship) only in James 4:4. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Storge<\/span><em>,<\/em> connoting natural affection between relatives, appears occasionally in compounds. By far the most frequent word is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agape<\/span><em>,<\/em> generally assumed to mean moral goodwill that proceeds from esteem, principle, or duty rather than attraction of charm. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Agape<\/span> is very similar in meaning to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hesed<\/span> in that both denote dedication. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Agape<\/span> specifically means to love the undeserving, despite disappointment and rejection. The difference between <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agapao<\/span> and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">phileo<\/span> is difficult to sustain in all passages. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Agape<\/span> is especially appropriate for divine love. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Agape<\/span> was long believed to be a Christian coinage, but pagan occurrences have recently been claimed. The verb <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agapao<\/span> was frequent in the Greek OT. Though <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agape<\/span> has more to do with moral principle than with inclination or liking, it never means the cold religious kindness shown from duty alone, as scriptural examples abundantly prove.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>In a sinful and suffering world, Jesus’ divine love showed itself supremely in compassion and healing for the distressed and in redemptive concern for the alienated and the self-despairing. Hence, the kingdom Christ proclaimed offered good news to the poor, captives, blind, and oppressed (Mt 11:2-5; Lk 4:18), while the attitude of Jesus toward those ostracized, despised, or grieving over sin in some far country of the soul assured them of forgiveness and a welcome return to the Father’s house (Lk 15). Such forgiveness was free, its only precondition being readiness to receive it in repentance and faith.<\/p>\n<p>Moreover, the good news of divine love does impose its own obligation: to love God and to love others as God does (Mt 5:44-48). The first and greatest commandment in God’s law is “You shall love the Lord your God. . . . And a second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets” (Mt 22:35-40, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Lv 19:18; Dt 6:5).<\/p>\n<p>The first commandment is not identical with, lost in, or only fulfilled through the second; it is separate and primary. What Jesus meant by loving God is indicated by his own habits of public worship, private prayer, and absolute obedience. Love for one’s neighbor is nowhere defined but everywhere illustrated. In the parable of the good Samaritan, “neighbor” is shown to mean anyone near enough to help, and love involves whatever service the neighbor’s situation demands. The parable of the sheep and goats shows love feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the sick and the imprisoned. In the untiring example of Jesus, love heals, teaches, adapts instruction to the hearers by parable and symbolic language, defends those criticized or despised, pronounces forgiveness, comforts the bereaved, befriends the lonely. We are to love others as he has loved us and as we love ourselves. Such imaginative transfer of self-love does good without expecting return, never returns ill treatment, ensures unfailing courtesy even to the lowliest, sustains thoughtful understanding that tempers judgment.<\/p>\n<p>To Jesus, the outstanding sin was lovelessness, the willful omission of any possible good, passing by on the other side while others suffer, ignoring the destitute at one’s gate, withholding forgiveness. Lovelessness was made worse by self-righteousness, censoriousness, the religious insensitivity that ignores another’s distress to preserve some petty ritual regulation. In the end, obedience to or neglect of the law of love will determine everyone’s eternal destiny (Mt 25:31-46).<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of Paul<\/h5>\n<p>The apostolic church quickly grasped the revolutionary principle that love is enough. Paul’s declaration that love fulfills the whole law is almost a quotation from Jesus. His exposition of various commandments against adultery, killing, stealing, and coveting is summarized in loving, because love can do no wrong to a neighbor (Rom 13:8-10). Ephesians 4:25–5:2 makes the same point another way: all bitterness, anger, lying, stealing, slander, and malice are to be replaced by tenderness, forgiveness, and kindness.<\/p>\n<p>Love is, for Paul, “the law of Christ,” supreme and sufficient (Gal 5:14; 6:2), and Paul neatly defines what alone “avails” in Christianity as “faith working through love” (5:6). He insists that the supreme manifestation of the Spirit that Christians should covet is “the more excellent way” of love (1 Cor 12:27–13:13; cf. Rom 5:5; Gal 5:22). Here, too, he contrasts love with five other expressions of religious zeal much prized at Corinth in order to show that each is profitless without love (1 Cor 13:1-3). He ends the chapter by comparing love with faith and hope, the other enduring elements of religious experience, and declares love to be the greatest.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s description of love in action includes liberality, acts of mercy, and hospitality; avoidance of revenge; sympathy; rejoicing with others; sharing of weakness, shame, or need; restoring, supporting, and edifying others, giving them all honor, kindness, forgiveness, encouragement; restraining criticism, even of the divisive, overscrupulous “weaker brother”—the list is almost endless. More generally, love is revealed as a quality of activity, of thinking, and of suffering (1 Cor 13:4-8). In brief, love does no harm and omits no good; it is God’s law.<\/p>\n<p>According to Paul, God showed his love for us in that Christ died for us. Because of his great love, he made us alive in Christ; in that love we live, by it we conquer, and from it nothing shall separate us (Rom 5:8; 8:32-39; 2 Cor 13:14; Eph 2:4; 2 Thes 2:16; Ti 3:4-5). Our love reflects the love first “poured into our hearts” (Rom 5:5), and it is directed toward Christ (1 Cor 7; 16:22; Eph 6:24) and toward others, whom we love for his sake.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of John<\/h5>\n<p>What John later recalled, and reflected upon, forms the crown of biblical teaching about love. For John, love was the foundation of all that had happened—“God so loved the world” (Jn 3:16; 16:27; 17:23). This is how we know love at all: Christ laid down his life for us (1 Jn 3:16). The mutual love of Father, Son, and disciples must be the fundamental fact in Christianity because God himself is love (4:8, 16).<\/p>\n<p>We know this by the Incarnation and by the cross (1 Jn 4:9-10). Thus we know and believe the love God has for us, and that love itself is divine (“of God”). It follows that “he who loves is born of God.” “He who does not love does not know God.” Such a person “is in the darkness,” “is not of God,” and “remains in death.” No one has ever seen God; nevertheless “if we love, . . . God abides in us” and we in God.<\/p>\n<p>God’s love is thus prior and original; if we love at all, it is “because he first loved.” Our love is directed first toward God, and John is exceedingly searching in his tests of that Godward love. It demands that we “love not the world,” that we “keep his word [and] his commandments,” and that we love our Christian brothers and sisters. This commandment we received from Christ, “that he who loves God should love his brother also,” for “if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another.” Twelve times John stressed the duty of mutual loyalty and love. Indeed, if one closes his heart against his brother or sister, “how does God’s love abide in him?”<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis upon the mutual love of Christians has been held a serious limitation of the love Jesus required. “Your brother” appears to have supplanted “your neighbor.” In this respect the commandment given in the upper room (Jn 13:34) is “new” compared with that in Matthew 22:39 (citing Lv 19:18), and the circumstances explain why. The night on which Jesus was betrayed was shadowed by the surrounding world’s hostility, the imminent crucifixion, and the defection of Judas. All the future depended upon the mutual loyalty of the 11 disciples, standing together under social pressure. By the time of John’s letter, new defections had rent the church. A perversion of the gospel called Gnosticism, essentially intellectualist, proud, “giving no heed to love” (Ignatius), had drawn away leaders and adherents (1 Jn 2:19, 26). Once again mutual loyalty was all-important, and John wrote expressly to consolidate and maintain the apostolic fellowship (1 Jn 1:3).<\/p>\n<p>However, love for one’s fellow Christians does not exclude, but instead leads on to, a wider love (cf. 2 Pt 1:7). John insists that God loved the whole world (Jn 3:16; 1 Jn 2:2; 4:14). Moreover, if love fails within the Christian fellowship, it certainly will not flourish beyond it but evaporate in mere words (1 Jn 3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In countering the loveless conceit of Gnostic Christianity, John’s concern was with the basic commandment of love to God and people as at once the criterion and the consummation of true Christian life. He does not, therefore, detail the many-sided expressions of love. For description of love in action, his mind recalls Christ’s words about “keeping commandments” and “laying down life” in sacrifice (Jn 15:10, 13; 1 Jn 3:16), and he mentioned especially love’s noticing a brother’s need, and so sharing this world’s goods (v 17). Terse as these expressions are, they contain the heart of Christian love. John’s forthright realism in testing all religious claims ensures that for him love could be no vague sentimentalism.<\/p>\n<p>The Christian ideal can only be socially fulfilled within a disciple band, a divine kingdom, the Father’s family, the Christian fellowship. In Scripture, love is no abstract idea, conceived to provide a self-explanatory, self-motivating “norm” to resolve the problem in every moral situation. It is rooted in the divine nature, expressed in the coming and death of Christ, experienced in salvation, and so kindled within the saved. Thus it is central, essential, and indispensable to Christianity. For God is love.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Grace; Mercy; Wrath of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LOVE<\/h3>\n<p>Prominent virtue in Christian theology and ethics. It is therefore important to understand clearly this exceedingly important term.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Sexual love <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ahabah<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">dod<\/span><em>)<\/em> is spoken of in the stories of Adam and Eve and of Jacob and Rachel, as well as in the Song of Songs. A higher form of love, involving loyalty, steadfastness, and kindness, is expressed by the Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hesed<\/span><em>,<\/em> which is sometimes rendered “loyalty” (2 Sm 22:26, <span>rsv<\/span>), but more often “steadfast love” or “loving-kindness.”<\/p>\n<p>The connotation of this significant word is clear in Hosea 2:19-20: “I will make you my wife forever, showing you righteousness and justice, unfailing love and compassion. I will be faithful to you and make you mine, and you will finally know me as <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>); in Job 6:14-15, where kindness is compared with treachery; and in 1 Samuel 20:8, which speaks of covenanted kindness. This unshakable, steadfast love of God is contrasted with the unpredictable, capricious moods of heathen deities. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Hesed<\/span> is not an emotional response to beauty, merit, or kindness but rather a moral attitude dedicated to another’s good, whether or not that other is lovable, worthy, or responsive (see Dt 7:7-9).<\/p>\n<p>This enduring loyalty, rooted in an unswerving purpose of good, could be stern, determined to discipline a wayward people, as several prophets warned. But God’s love does not change. Through exile and failure it persisted with infinite patience, neither condoning evil nor abandoning the evildoers. It has within it kindness, tenderness, and compassion (Pss 86:15; 103:1-18; 136; Hos 11:1-4), but its chief characteristic is an accepted moral obligation for another’s welfare.<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, response was expected. The Law enjoined wholehearted love and gratitude for God’s choosing and redeeming of Israel (Dt 6:20-25). This was to be shown in worship and especially in humane treatment of the poor, the defenseless, the resident alien, slaves, widows, and all suffering oppression and cruelty. Hosea similarly expected steadfast love among people to result from the steadfast love of God toward people (Hos 6:6; 7:1-7; 10:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Love for God and for “your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19:18) are thus linked in Israel’s law and prophecy. While much love of another kind lies within the OT, these are the major points: God’s loving initiative, the moral quality of love, and the close relationship between love for God with loving others.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Of the Greek words available to describe love, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">eros<\/span> (sexual love) does not occur in the NT. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Phileo<\/span><em>,<\/em> connoting natural affection, occurs some 25 times, with <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">philadelphia<\/span> (brotherly love) five times, and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">philia<\/span> (friendship) only in James 4:4. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Storge<\/span><em>,<\/em> connoting natural affection between relatives, appears occasionally in compounds. By far the most frequent word is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agape<\/span><em>,<\/em> generally assumed to mean moral goodwill that proceeds from esteem, principle, or duty rather than attraction of charm. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Agape<\/span> is very similar in meaning to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hesed<\/span> in that both denote dedication. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Agape<\/span> specifically means to love the undeserving, despite disappointment and rejection. The difference between <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agapao<\/span> and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">phileo<\/span> is difficult to sustain in all passages. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Agape<\/span> is especially appropriate for divine love. <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Agape<\/span> was long believed to be a Christian coinage, but pagan occurrences have recently been claimed. The verb <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agapao<\/span> was frequent in the Greek OT. Though <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agape<\/span> has more to do with moral principle than with inclination or liking, it never means the cold religious kindness shown from duty alone, as scriptural examples abundantly prove.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>In a sinful and suffering world, Jesus’ divine love showed itself supremely in compassion and healing for the distressed and in redemptive concern for the alienated and the self-despairing. Hence, the kingdom Christ proclaimed offered good news to the poor, captives, blind, and oppressed (Mt 11:2-5; Lk 4:18), while the attitude of Jesus toward those ostracized, despised, or grieving over sin in some far country of the soul assured them of forgiveness and a welcome return to the Father’s house (Lk 15). Such forgiveness was free, its only precondition being readiness to receive it in repentance and faith.<\/p>\n<p>Moreover, the good news of divine love does impose its own obligation: to love God and to love others as God does (Mt 5:44-48). The first and greatest commandment in God’s law is “You shall love the Lord your God. . . . And a second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets” (Mt 22:35-40, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Lv 19:18; Dt 6:5).<\/p>\n<p>The first commandment is not identical with, lost in, or only fulfilled through the second; it is separate and primary. What Jesus meant by loving God is indicated by his own habits of public worship, private prayer, and absolute obedience. Love for one’s neighbor is nowhere defined but everywhere illustrated. In the parable of the good Samaritan, “neighbor” is shown to mean anyone near enough to help, and love involves whatever service the neighbor’s situation demands. The parable of the sheep and goats shows love feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the sick and the imprisoned. In the untiring example of Jesus, love heals, teaches, adapts instruction to the hearers by parable and symbolic language, defends those criticized or despised, pronounces forgiveness, comforts the bereaved, befriends the lonely. We are to love others as he has loved us and as we love ourselves. Such imaginative transfer of self-love does good without expecting return, never returns ill treatment, ensures unfailing courtesy even to the lowliest, sustains thoughtful understanding that tempers judgment.<\/p>\n<p>To Jesus, the outstanding sin was lovelessness, the willful omission of any possible good, passing by on the other side while others suffer, ignoring the destitute at one’s gate, withholding forgiveness. Lovelessness was made worse by self-righteousness, censoriousness, the religious insensitivity that ignores another’s distress to preserve some petty ritual regulation. In the end, obedience to or neglect of the law of love will determine everyone’s eternal destiny (Mt 25:31-46).<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of Paul<\/h5>\n<p>The apostolic church quickly grasped the revolutionary principle that love is enough. Paul’s declaration that love fulfills the whole law is almost a quotation from Jesus. His exposition of various commandments against adultery, killing, stealing, and coveting is summarized in loving, because love can do no wrong to a neighbor (Rom 13:8-10). Ephesians 4:25–5:2 makes the same point another way: all bitterness, anger, lying, stealing, slander, and malice are to be replaced by tenderness, forgiveness, and kindness.<\/p>\n<p>Love is, for Paul, “the law of Christ,” supreme and sufficient (Gal 5:14; 6:2), and Paul neatly defines what alone “avails” in Christianity as “faith working through love” (5:6). He insists that the supreme manifestation of the Spirit that Christians should covet is “the more excellent way” of love (1 Cor 12:27–13:13; cf. Rom 5:5; Gal 5:22). Here, too, he contrasts love with five other expressions of religious zeal much prized at Corinth in order to show that each is profitless without love (1 Cor 13:1-3). He ends the chapter by comparing love with faith and hope, the other enduring elements of religious experience, and declares love to be the greatest.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s description of love in action includes liberality, acts of mercy, and hospitality; avoidance of revenge; sympathy; rejoicing with others; sharing of weakness, shame, or need; restoring, supporting, and edifying others, giving them all honor, kindness, forgiveness, encouragement; restraining criticism, even of the divisive, overscrupulous “weaker brother”—the list is almost endless. More generally, love is revealed as a quality of activity, of thinking, and of suffering (1 Cor 13:4-8). In brief, love does no harm and omits no good; it is God’s law.<\/p>\n<p>According to Paul, God showed his love for us in that Christ died for us. Because of his great love, he made us alive in Christ; in that love we live, by it we conquer, and from it nothing shall separate us (Rom 5:8; 8:32-39; 2 Cor 13:14; Eph 2:4; 2 Thes 2:16; Ti 3:4-5). Our love reflects the love first “poured into our hearts” (Rom 5:5), and it is directed toward Christ (1 Cor 7; 16:22; Eph 6:24) and toward others, whom we love for his sake.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of John<\/h5>\n<p>What John later recalled, and reflected upon, forms the crown of biblical teaching about love. For John, love was the foundation of all that had happened—“God so loved the world” (Jn 3:16; 16:27; 17:23). This is how we know love at all: Christ laid down his life for us (1 Jn 3:16). The mutual love of Father, Son, and disciples must be the fundamental fact in Christianity because God himself is love (4:8, 16).<\/p>\n<p>We know this by the Incarnation and by the cross (1 Jn 4:9-10). Thus we know and believe the love God has for us, and that love itself is divine (“of God”). It follows that “he who loves is born of God.” “He who does not love does not know God.” Such a person “is in the darkness,” “is not of God,” and “remains in death.” No one has ever seen God; nevertheless “if we love, . . . God abides in us” and we in God.<\/p>\n<p>God’s love is thus prior and original; if we love at all, it is “because he first loved.” Our love is directed first toward God, and John is exceedingly searching in his tests of that Godward love. It demands that we “love not the world,” that we “keep his word [and] his commandments,” and that we love our Christian brothers and sisters. This commandment we received from Christ, “that he who loves God should love his brother also,” for “if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another.” Twelve times John stressed the duty of mutual loyalty and love. Indeed, if one closes his heart against his brother or sister, “how does God’s love abide in him?”<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis upon the mutual love of Christians has been held a serious limitation of the love Jesus required. “Your brother” appears to have supplanted “your neighbor.” In this respect the commandment given in the upper room (Jn 13:34) is “new” compared with that in Matthew 22:39 (citing Lv 19:18), and the circumstances explain why. The night on which Jesus was betrayed was shadowed by the surrounding world’s hostility, the imminent crucifixion, and the defection of Judas. All the future depended upon the mutual loyalty of the 11 disciples, standing together under social pressure. By the time of John’s letter, new defections had rent the church. A perversion of the gospel called Gnosticism, essentially intellectualist, proud, “giving no heed to love” (Ignatius), had drawn away leaders and adherents (1 Jn 2:19, 26). Once again mutual loyalty was all-important, and John wrote expressly to consolidate and maintain the apostolic fellowship (1 Jn 1:3).<\/p>\n<p>However, love for one’s fellow Christians does not exclude, but instead leads on to, a wider love (cf. 2 Pt 1:7). John insists that God loved the whole world (Jn 3:16; 1 Jn 2:2; 4:14). Moreover, if love fails within the Christian fellowship, it certainly will not flourish beyond it but evaporate in mere words (1 Jn 3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In countering the loveless conceit of Gnostic Christianity, John’s concern was with the basic commandment of love to God and people as at once the criterion and the consummation of true Christian life. He does not, therefore, detail the many-sided expressions of love. For description of love in action, his mind recalls Christ’s words about “keeping commandments” and “laying down life” in sacrifice (Jn 15:10, 13; 1 Jn 3:16), and he mentioned especially love’s noticing a brother’s need, and so sharing this world’s goods (v 17). Terse as these expressions are, they contain the heart of Christian love. John’s forthright realism in testing all religious claims ensures that for him love could be no vague sentimentalism.<\/p>\n<p>The Christian ideal can only be socially fulfilled within a disciple band, a divine kingdom, the Father’s family, the Christian fellowship. In Scripture, love is no abstract idea, conceived to provide a self-explanatory, self-motivating “norm” to resolve the problem in every moral situation. It is rooted in the divine nature, expressed in the coming and death of Christ, experienced in salvation, and so kindled within the saved. Thus it is central, essential, and indispensable to Christianity. For God is love.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Grace; Mercy; Wrath of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LOVE Prominent virtue in Christian theology and ethics. It is therefore important to understand clearly this exceedingly important term. In the Old Testament Sexual love (ahabah and dod) is spoken of in the stories of Adam and Eve and of Jacob and Rachel, as well as in the Song of Songs. A higher form of love, involving loyalty, steadfastness, and kindness, is expressed by the Hebrew word hesed, which is sometimes rendered “loyalty” (2 Sm 22:26, rsv), but more often “steadfast love” or “lovin...","summary_en":"LOVE Prominent virtue in Christian theology and ethics. It is therefore important to understand clearly this exceedingly important term. In the Old Testament Sexual love (ahabah and dod) is spoken of in the stories of Adam and Eve and of Jacob and Rachel, as well as in the Song of Songs. A higher form of love, involving loyalty, steadfastness, and kindness, is expressed by the Hebrew word hesed, which is sometimes rendered “loyalty” (2 Sm 22:26, rsv), but more often “steadfast love” or “lovin...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23841,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Machaerus*","title_en":"Machaerus*","content_ro":"<h3>MACHAERUS*<\/h3>\n<p>Fortified castle where John the Baptist was imprisoned and later beheaded by Herod Antipas (according to Josephus’s <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.5.2). The name does not occur in canonical Scripture nor in the Apocrypha, but it was one of the strongest fortresses in all Palestine, having been built by Alexander Janneus (Josephus’s <em>War<\/em> 7.6.1-4). It was destroyed by Gabinius in the wars of Pompey (<em>War<\/em> 1.8.5) but restored and greatly enlarged by Herod the Great, who built a magnificent palace within the enclosure. It was situated east of the Dead Sea at the southern extremity of Perea on a promontory overlooking the Dead Sea. It is identified with the modern M’Khaur.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew (Mt 14:1-12) and Mark (Mk 6:17-29) report that Herod, upon hearing of the fame of Jesus, attributed his miracle-working power to John the Baptist, whom he believed had been restored to life. The confinement of John the Baptist was apparently not so rigorous as to exclude the visit of friends (Mt 11:2-3; Lk 7:18-20). It was from this castle that the Arabian wife of Herod, who had been repudiated by him for the sake of Herodias, fled to her father, Aretas, the king of Arabia. This precipitated the war between Herod and Aretas (Josephus’s <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.5.1) and resulted in the defeat of Herod.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MACHAERUS*<\/h3>\n<p>Fortified castle where John the Baptist was imprisoned and later beheaded by Herod Antipas (according to Josephus’s <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.5.2). The name does not occur in canonical Scripture nor in the Apocrypha, but it was one of the strongest fortresses in all Palestine, having been built by Alexander Janneus (Josephus’s <em>War<\/em> 7.6.1-4). It was destroyed by Gabinius in the wars of Pompey (<em>War<\/em> 1.8.5) but restored and greatly enlarged by Herod the Great, who built a magnificent palace within the enclosure. It was situated east of the Dead Sea at the southern extremity of Perea on a promontory overlooking the Dead Sea. It is identified with the modern M’Khaur.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew (Mt 14:1-12) and Mark (Mk 6:17-29) report that Herod, upon hearing of the fame of Jesus, attributed his miracle-working power to John the Baptist, whom he believed had been restored to life. The confinement of John the Baptist was apparently not so rigorous as to exclude the visit of friends (Mt 11:2-3; Lk 7:18-20). It was from this castle that the Arabian wife of Herod, who had been repudiated by him for the sake of Herodias, fled to her father, Aretas, the king of Arabia. This precipitated the war between Herod and Aretas (Josephus’s <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.5.1) and resulted in the defeat of Herod.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MACHAERUS* Fortified castle where John the Baptist was imprisoned and later beheaded by Herod Antipas (according to Josephus’s Antiquities 18.5.2). The name does not occur in canonical Scripture nor in the Apocrypha, but it was one of the strongest fortresses in all Palestine, having been built by Alexander Janneus (Josephus’s War 7.6.1-4). It was destroyed by Gabinius in the wars of Pompey (War 1.8.5) but restored and greatly enlarged by Herod the Great, who built a magnificent palace within...","summary_en":"MACHAERUS* Fortified castle where John the Baptist was imprisoned and later beheaded by Herod Antipas (according to Josephus’s Antiquities 18.5.2). The name does not occur in canonical Scripture nor in the Apocrypha, but it was one of the strongest fortresses in all Palestine, having been built by Alexander Janneus (Josephus’s War 7.6.1-4). It was destroyed by Gabinius in the wars of Pompey (War 1.8.5) but restored and greatly enlarged by Herod the Great, who built a magnificent palace within...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24756,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of Matthew","title_en":"Gospel of Matthew","content_ro":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","summary_en":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54692,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:2","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:2–20:34<\/strong> This section highlights the two primary responses to Jesus: acceptance and rejection. The first section (11:2–12:50) features the rejection of Jesus by Jewish leaders while his disciples were learning to understand and accept him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:2–20:34<\/strong> This section highlights the two primary responses to Jesus: acceptance and rejection. The first section (11:2–12:50) features the rejection of Jesus by Jewish leaders while his disciples were learning to understand and accept him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:2–20:34 This section highlights the two primary responses to Jesus: acceptance and rejection. The first section (11:2–12:50) features the rejection of Jesus by Jewish leaders while his disciples were learning to understand and accept him.","summary_en":"11:2–20:34 This section highlights the two primary responses to Jesus: acceptance and rejection. The first section (11:2–12:50) features the rejection of Jesus by Jewish leaders while his disciples were learning to understand and accept him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54693,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:2","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:2-19<\/strong> This section begins with John the Baptist’s doubt, but it ends by exalting his faith and ministry (11:7-19). The people’s rejection of John (11:16-19) foreshadows their later rejection of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:2-19<\/strong> This section begins with John the Baptist’s doubt, but it ends by exalting his faith and ministry (11:7-19). The people’s rejection of John (11:16-19) foreshadows their later rejection of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:2-19 This section begins with John the Baptist’s doubt, but it ends by exalting his faith and ministry (11:7-19). The people’s rejection of John (11:16-19) foreshadows their later rejection of Jesus.","summary_en":"11:2-19 This section begins with John the Baptist’s doubt, but it ends by exalting his faith and ministry (11:7-19). The people’s rejection of John (11:16-19) foreshadows their later rejection of Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54694,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:2","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:2<\/strong> <em>John<\/em> was arrested (4:12) by Herod Antipas because he had denounced Herod’s immoral relationship with Herodias, his half-brother’s wife (14:1-12). • <em>the things the Messiah was doing:<\/em> These actions demonstrated that he is the Messiah (8:1–9:34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:2<\/strong> <em>John<\/em> was arrested (4:12) by Herod Antipas because he had denounced Herod’s immoral relationship with Herodias, his half-brother’s wife (14:1-12). • <em>the things the Messiah was doing:<\/em> These actions demonstrated that he is the Messiah (8:1–9:34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:2 John was arrested (4:12) by Herod Antipas because he had denounced Herod’s immoral relationship with Herodias, his half-brother’s wife (14:1-12). • the things the Messiah was doing: These actions demonstrated that he is the Messiah (8:1–9:34).","summary_en":"11:2 John was arrested (4:12) by Herod Antipas because he had denounced Herod’s immoral relationship with Herodias, his half-brother’s wife (14:1-12). • the things the Messiah was doing: These actions demonstrated that he is the Messiah (8:1–9:34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82318,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:2","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:2–20:34<\/strong> This section highlights the two primary responses to Jesus: acceptance and rejection. The first section (11:2–12:50) features the rejection of Jesus by Jewish leaders while his disciples were learning to understand and accept him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:2–20:34<\/strong> This section highlights the two primary responses to Jesus: acceptance and rejection. The first section (11:2–12:50) features the rejection of Jesus by Jewish leaders while his disciples were learning to understand and accept him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:2–20:34 This section highlights the two primary responses to Jesus: acceptance and rejection. The first section (11:2–12:50) features the rejection of Jesus by Jewish leaders while his disciples were learning to understand and accept him.","summary_en":"11:2–20:34 This section highlights the two primary responses to Jesus: acceptance and rejection. The first section (11:2–12:50) features the rejection of Jesus by Jewish leaders while his disciples were learning to understand and accept him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82319,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:2","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:2-19<\/strong> This section begins with John the Baptist’s doubt, but it ends by exalting his faith and ministry (11:7-19). The people’s rejection of John (11:16-19) foreshadows their later rejection of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:2-19<\/strong> This section begins with John the Baptist’s doubt, but it ends by exalting his faith and ministry (11:7-19). The people’s rejection of John (11:16-19) foreshadows their later rejection of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:2-19 This section begins with John the Baptist’s doubt, but it ends by exalting his faith and ministry (11:7-19). The people’s rejection of John (11:16-19) foreshadows their later rejection of Jesus.","summary_en":"11:2-19 This section begins with John the Baptist’s doubt, but it ends by exalting his faith and ministry (11:7-19). The people’s rejection of John (11:16-19) foreshadows their later rejection of Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82320,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:2","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:2<\/strong> <em>John<\/em> was arrested (4:12) by Herod Antipas because he had denounced Herod’s immoral relationship with Herodias, his half-brother’s wife (14:1-12). • <em>the things the Messiah was doing:<\/em> These actions demonstrated that he is the Messiah (8:1–9:34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:2<\/strong> <em>John<\/em> was arrested (4:12) by Herod Antipas because he had denounced Herod’s immoral relationship with Herodias, his half-brother’s wife (14:1-12). • <em>the things the Messiah was doing:<\/em> These actions demonstrated that he is the Messiah (8:1–9:34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:2 John was arrested (4:12) by Herod Antipas because he had denounced Herod’s immoral relationship with Herodias, his half-brother’s wife (14:1-12). • the things the Messiah was doing: These actions demonstrated that he is the Messiah (8:1–9:34).","summary_en":"11:2 John was arrested (4:12) by Herod Antipas because he had denounced Herod’s immoral relationship with Herodias, his half-brother’s wife (14:1-12). • the things the Messiah was doing: These actions demonstrated that he is the Messiah (8:1–9:34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":109944,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:2","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:2–20:34<\/strong> This section highlights the two primary responses to Jesus: acceptance and rejection. The first section (11:2–12:50) features the rejection of Jesus by Jewish leaders while his disciples were learning to understand and accept him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:2–20:34<\/strong> This section highlights the two primary responses to Jesus: acceptance and rejection. The first section (11:2–12:50) features the rejection of Jesus by Jewish leaders while his disciples were learning to understand and accept him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:2–20:34 This section highlights the two primary responses to Jesus: acceptance and rejection. The first section (11:2–12:50) features the rejection of Jesus by Jewish leaders while his disciples were learning to understand and accept him.","summary_en":"11:2–20:34 This section highlights the two primary responses to Jesus: acceptance and rejection. The first section (11:2–12:50) features the rejection of Jesus by Jewish leaders while his disciples were learning to understand and accept him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":109945,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:2","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:2-19<\/strong> This section begins with John the Baptist’s doubt, but it ends by exalting his faith and ministry (11:7-19). The people’s rejection of John (11:16-19) foreshadows their later rejection of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:2-19<\/strong> This section begins with John the Baptist’s doubt, but it ends by exalting his faith and ministry (11:7-19). The people’s rejection of John (11:16-19) foreshadows their later rejection of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:2-19 This section begins with John the Baptist’s doubt, but it ends by exalting his faith and ministry (11:7-19). The people’s rejection of John (11:16-19) foreshadows their later rejection of Jesus.","summary_en":"11:2-19 This section begins with John the Baptist’s doubt, but it ends by exalting his faith and ministry (11:7-19). The people’s rejection of John (11:16-19) foreshadows their later rejection of Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":109946,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:2","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:2<\/strong> <em>John<\/em> was arrested (4:12) by Herod Antipas because he had denounced Herod’s immoral relationship with Herodias, his half-brother’s wife (14:1-12). • <em>the things the Messiah was doing:<\/em> These actions demonstrated that he is the Messiah (8:1–9:34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:2<\/strong> <em>John<\/em> was arrested (4:12) by Herod Antipas because he had denounced Herod’s immoral relationship with Herodias, his half-brother’s wife (14:1-12). • <em>the things the Messiah was doing:<\/em> These actions demonstrated that he is the Messiah (8:1–9:34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:2 John was arrested (4:12) by Herod Antipas because he had denounced Herod’s immoral relationship with Herodias, his half-brother’s wife (14:1-12). • the things the Messiah was doing: These actions demonstrated that he is the Messiah (8:1–9:34).","summary_en":"11:2 John was arrested (4:12) by Herod Antipas because he had denounced Herod’s immoral relationship with Herodias, his half-brother’s wife (14:1-12). • the things the Messiah was doing: These actions demonstrated that he is the Messiah (8:1–9:34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137570,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:2","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:2–20:34<\/strong> This section highlights the two primary responses to Jesus: acceptance and rejection. The first section (11:2–12:50) features the rejection of Jesus by Jewish leaders while his disciples were learning to understand and accept him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:2–20:34<\/strong> This section highlights the two primary responses to Jesus: acceptance and rejection. The first section (11:2–12:50) features the rejection of Jesus by Jewish leaders while his disciples were learning to understand and accept him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:2–20:34 This section highlights the two primary responses to Jesus: acceptance and rejection. The first section (11:2–12:50) features the rejection of Jesus by Jewish leaders while his disciples were learning to understand and accept him.","summary_en":"11:2–20:34 This section highlights the two primary responses to Jesus: acceptance and rejection. The first section (11:2–12:50) features the rejection of Jesus by Jewish leaders while his disciples were learning to understand and accept him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137571,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:2","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:2-19<\/strong> This section begins with John the Baptist’s doubt, but it ends by exalting his faith and ministry (11:7-19). The people’s rejection of John (11:16-19) foreshadows their later rejection of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:2-19<\/strong> This section begins with John the Baptist’s doubt, but it ends by exalting his faith and ministry (11:7-19). The people’s rejection of John (11:16-19) foreshadows their later rejection of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:2-19 This section begins with John the Baptist’s doubt, but it ends by exalting his faith and ministry (11:7-19). The people’s rejection of John (11:16-19) foreshadows their later rejection of Jesus.","summary_en":"11:2-19 This section begins with John the Baptist’s doubt, but it ends by exalting his faith and ministry (11:7-19). The people’s rejection of John (11:16-19) foreshadows their later rejection of Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137572,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:2","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:2<\/strong> <em>John<\/em> was arrested (4:12) by Herod Antipas because he had denounced Herod’s immoral relationship with Herodias, his half-brother’s wife (14:1-12). • <em>the things the Messiah was doing:<\/em> These actions demonstrated that he is the Messiah (8:1–9:34).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:2<\/strong> <em>John<\/em> was arrested (4:12) by Herod Antipas because he had denounced Herod’s immoral relationship with Herodias, his half-brother’s wife (14:1-12). • <em>the things the Messiah was doing:<\/em> These actions demonstrated that he is the Messiah (8:1–9:34).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:2 John was arrested (4:12) by Herod Antipas because he had denounced Herod’s immoral relationship with Herodias, his half-brother’s wife (14:1-12). • the things the Messiah was doing: These actions demonstrated that he is the Messiah (8:1–9:34).","summary_en":"11:2 John was arrested (4:12) by Herod Antipas because he had denounced Herod’s immoral relationship with Herodias, his half-brother’s wife (14:1-12). • the things the Messiah was doing: These actions demonstrated that he is the Messiah (8:1–9:34).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64896,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Genealogy of Jesus","title_en":"Genealogy of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Genealogy of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Both Matthew and Luke provide genealogies of Jesus (Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38). The two genealogies differ for the generations following King David. Matthew follows the line of David’s son Solomon, while Luke follows the line of David’s son Nathan. One possible explanation is that Matthew records Joseph’s genealogy while Luke records Mary’s (in which case Joseph would have been Heli’s son-in-law).<\/p>\n<p>Genealogies were kept quite accurately in Judaism, as Josephus confirms (Josephus, <em>Life<\/em> 1). Genealogies were important in the Old Testament and in Judaism generally because land rights were apportioned to families in Israel and because certain offices, such as priest and king, were inherited from father to son. Genealogies sometimes ran a record from the past to the present to illustrate religious themes, family descent, or political ties, as well as simple chronology (1 Chr 1–9). Most such lists were representative rather than a complete list of every individual.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of Matthew’s genealogy, unlike Luke’s, is to show Jesus’ heritage as running from Abraham through David. Jesus’ genealogy confirms him as a legitimate heir to the throne of David. So Jesus’ genealogy in Matthew goes back to Abraham, the father of the Jewish race. By contrast, the genealogy in Luke goes all the way back to Adam. This is consistent with Luke’s emphasis on Jesus as the Savior for all people everywhere.<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew’s genealogy, the unusual mention of women with stained reputations (Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba), some of them Gentiles, is noteworthy and emphasizes God’s grace to redeem even those deemed unworthy by others.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ genealogies do not prove that Jesus is the Messiah, but they do make him a possible candidate. His identity as the Messiah becomes evident in other ways (Matt 11:2-6). God had guided the course of history to its climax. Jesus is the anticipated Messiah of the Old Testament, the Savior of his people, and the King descended from David assuming his throne (see 2 Sam 7:16). He is heir to Abraham and ultimately fulfills God’s promises to Abraham (Gen 12:1-3).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1-3; 2 Sam 7:16; Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Genealogy of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Both Matthew and Luke provide genealogies of Jesus (Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38). The two genealogies differ for the generations following King David. Matthew follows the line of David’s son Solomon, while Luke follows the line of David’s son Nathan. One possible explanation is that Matthew records Joseph’s genealogy while Luke records Mary’s (in which case Joseph would have been Heli’s son-in-law).<\/p>\n<p>Genealogies were kept quite accurately in Judaism, as Josephus confirms (Josephus, <em>Life<\/em> 1). Genealogies were important in the Old Testament and in Judaism generally because land rights were apportioned to families in Israel and because certain offices, such as priest and king, were inherited from father to son. Genealogies sometimes ran a record from the past to the present to illustrate religious themes, family descent, or political ties, as well as simple chronology (1 Chr 1–9). Most such lists were representative rather than a complete list of every individual.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of Matthew’s genealogy, unlike Luke’s, is to show Jesus’ heritage as running from Abraham through David. Jesus’ genealogy confirms him as a legitimate heir to the throne of David. So Jesus’ genealogy in Matthew goes back to Abraham, the father of the Jewish race. By contrast, the genealogy in Luke goes all the way back to Adam. This is consistent with Luke’s emphasis on Jesus as the Savior for all people everywhere.<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew’s genealogy, the unusual mention of women with stained reputations (Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba), some of them Gentiles, is noteworthy and emphasizes God’s grace to redeem even those deemed unworthy by others.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ genealogies do not prove that Jesus is the Messiah, but they do make him a possible candidate. His identity as the Messiah becomes evident in other ways (Matt 11:2-6). God had guided the course of history to its climax. Jesus is the anticipated Messiah of the Old Testament, the Savior of his people, and the King descended from David assuming his throne (see 2 Sam 7:16). He is heir to Abraham and ultimately fulfills God’s promises to Abraham (Gen 12:1-3).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1-3; 2 Sam 7:16; Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38<\/p>","summary_ro":"Genealogy of Jesus Both Matthew and Luke provide genealogies of Jesus (Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38). The two genealogies differ for the generations following King David. Matthew follows the line of David’s son Solomon, while Luke follows the line of David’s son Nathan. One possible explanation is that Matthew records Joseph’s genealogy while Luke records Mary’s (in which case Joseph would have been Heli’s son-in-law). Genealogies were kept quite accurately in Judaism, as Josephus confirms (Jose...","summary_en":"Genealogy of Jesus Both Matthew and Luke provide genealogies of Jesus (Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38). The two genealogies differ for the generations following King David. Matthew follows the line of David’s son Solomon, while Luke follows the line of David’s son Nathan. One possible explanation is that Matthew records Joseph’s genealogy while Luke records Mary’s (in which case Joseph would have been Heli’s son-in-law). Genealogies were kept quite accurately in Judaism, as Josephus confirms (Jose...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65100,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Messiah","title_en":"The Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","summary_en":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65129,"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":92522,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Genealogy of Jesus","title_en":"Genealogy of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Genealogy of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Both Matthew and Luke provide genealogies of Jesus (Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38). The two genealogies differ for the generations following King David. Matthew follows the line of David’s son Solomon, while Luke follows the line of David’s son Nathan. One possible explanation is that Matthew records Joseph’s genealogy while Luke records Mary’s (in which case Joseph would have been Heli’s son-in-law).<\/p>\n<p>Genealogies were kept quite accurately in Judaism, as Josephus confirms (Josephus, <em>Life<\/em> 1). Genealogies were important in the Old Testament and in Judaism generally because land rights were apportioned to families in Israel and because certain offices, such as priest and king, were inherited from father to son. Genealogies sometimes ran a record from the past to the present to illustrate religious themes, family descent, or political ties, as well as simple chronology (1 Chr 1–9). Most such lists were representative rather than a complete list of every individual.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of Matthew’s genealogy, unlike Luke’s, is to show Jesus’ heritage as running from Abraham through David. Jesus’ genealogy confirms him as a legitimate heir to the throne of David. So Jesus’ genealogy in Matthew goes back to Abraham, the father of the Jewish race. By contrast, the genealogy in Luke goes all the way back to Adam. This is consistent with Luke’s emphasis on Jesus as the Savior for all people everywhere.<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew’s genealogy, the unusual mention of women with stained reputations (Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba), some of them Gentiles, is noteworthy and emphasizes God’s grace to redeem even those deemed unworthy by others.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ genealogies do not prove that Jesus is the Messiah, but they do make him a possible candidate. His identity as the Messiah becomes evident in other ways (Matt 11:2-6). God had guided the course of history to its climax. Jesus is the anticipated Messiah of the Old Testament, the Savior of his people, and the King descended from David assuming his throne (see 2 Sam 7:16). He is heir to Abraham and ultimately fulfills God’s promises to Abraham (Gen 12:1-3).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1-3; 2 Sam 7:16; Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Genealogy of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Both Matthew and Luke provide genealogies of Jesus (Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38). The two genealogies differ for the generations following King David. Matthew follows the line of David’s son Solomon, while Luke follows the line of David’s son Nathan. One possible explanation is that Matthew records Joseph’s genealogy while Luke records Mary’s (in which case Joseph would have been Heli’s son-in-law).<\/p>\n<p>Genealogies were kept quite accurately in Judaism, as Josephus confirms (Josephus, <em>Life<\/em> 1). Genealogies were important in the Old Testament and in Judaism generally because land rights were apportioned to families in Israel and because certain offices, such as priest and king, were inherited from father to son. Genealogies sometimes ran a record from the past to the present to illustrate religious themes, family descent, or political ties, as well as simple chronology (1 Chr 1–9). Most such lists were representative rather than a complete list of every individual.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of Matthew’s genealogy, unlike Luke’s, is to show Jesus’ heritage as running from Abraham through David. Jesus’ genealogy confirms him as a legitimate heir to the throne of David. So Jesus’ genealogy in Matthew goes back to Abraham, the father of the Jewish race. By contrast, the genealogy in Luke goes all the way back to Adam. This is consistent with Luke’s emphasis on Jesus as the Savior for all people everywhere.<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew’s genealogy, the unusual mention of women with stained reputations (Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba), some of them Gentiles, is noteworthy and emphasizes God’s grace to redeem even those deemed unworthy by others.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ genealogies do not prove that Jesus is the Messiah, but they do make him a possible candidate. His identity as the Messiah becomes evident in other ways (Matt 11:2-6). God had guided the course of history to its climax. Jesus is the anticipated Messiah of the Old Testament, the Savior of his people, and the King descended from David assuming his throne (see 2 Sam 7:16). He is heir to Abraham and ultimately fulfills God’s promises to Abraham (Gen 12:1-3).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1-3; 2 Sam 7:16; Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38<\/p>","summary_ro":"Genealogy of Jesus Both Matthew and Luke provide genealogies of Jesus (Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38). The two genealogies differ for the generations following King David. Matthew follows the line of David’s son Solomon, while Luke follows the line of David’s son Nathan. One possible explanation is that Matthew records Joseph’s genealogy while Luke records Mary’s (in which case Joseph would have been Heli’s son-in-law). Genealogies were kept quite accurately in Judaism, as Josephus confirms (Jose...","summary_en":"Genealogy of Jesus Both Matthew and Luke provide genealogies of Jesus (Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38). The two genealogies differ for the generations following King David. Matthew follows the line of David’s son Solomon, while Luke follows the line of David’s son Nathan. One possible explanation is that Matthew records Joseph’s genealogy while Luke records Mary’s (in which case Joseph would have been Heli’s son-in-law). Genealogies were kept quite accurately in Judaism, as Josephus confirms (Jose...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92726,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Messiah","title_en":"The Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","summary_en":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92755,"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":120148,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Genealogy of Jesus","title_en":"Genealogy of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Genealogy of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Both Matthew and Luke provide genealogies of Jesus (Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38). The two genealogies differ for the generations following King David. Matthew follows the line of David’s son Solomon, while Luke follows the line of David’s son Nathan. One possible explanation is that Matthew records Joseph’s genealogy while Luke records Mary’s (in which case Joseph would have been Heli’s son-in-law).<\/p>\n<p>Genealogies were kept quite accurately in Judaism, as Josephus confirms (Josephus, <em>Life<\/em> 1). Genealogies were important in the Old Testament and in Judaism generally because land rights were apportioned to families in Israel and because certain offices, such as priest and king, were inherited from father to son. Genealogies sometimes ran a record from the past to the present to illustrate religious themes, family descent, or political ties, as well as simple chronology (1 Chr 1–9). Most such lists were representative rather than a complete list of every individual.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of Matthew’s genealogy, unlike Luke’s, is to show Jesus’ heritage as running from Abraham through David. Jesus’ genealogy confirms him as a legitimate heir to the throne of David. So Jesus’ genealogy in Matthew goes back to Abraham, the father of the Jewish race. By contrast, the genealogy in Luke goes all the way back to Adam. This is consistent with Luke’s emphasis on Jesus as the Savior for all people everywhere.<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew’s genealogy, the unusual mention of women with stained reputations (Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba), some of them Gentiles, is noteworthy and emphasizes God’s grace to redeem even those deemed unworthy by others.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ genealogies do not prove that Jesus is the Messiah, but they do make him a possible candidate. His identity as the Messiah becomes evident in other ways (Matt 11:2-6). God had guided the course of history to its climax. Jesus is the anticipated Messiah of the Old Testament, the Savior of his people, and the King descended from David assuming his throne (see 2 Sam 7:16). He is heir to Abraham and ultimately fulfills God’s promises to Abraham (Gen 12:1-3).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1-3; 2 Sam 7:16; Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Genealogy of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Both Matthew and Luke provide genealogies of Jesus (Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38). The two genealogies differ for the generations following King David. Matthew follows the line of David’s son Solomon, while Luke follows the line of David’s son Nathan. One possible explanation is that Matthew records Joseph’s genealogy while Luke records Mary’s (in which case Joseph would have been Heli’s son-in-law).<\/p>\n<p>Genealogies were kept quite accurately in Judaism, as Josephus confirms (Josephus, <em>Life<\/em> 1). Genealogies were important in the Old Testament and in Judaism generally because land rights were apportioned to families in Israel and because certain offices, such as priest and king, were inherited from father to son. Genealogies sometimes ran a record from the past to the present to illustrate religious themes, family descent, or political ties, as well as simple chronology (1 Chr 1–9). Most such lists were representative rather than a complete list of every individual.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of Matthew’s genealogy, unlike Luke’s, is to show Jesus’ heritage as running from Abraham through David. Jesus’ genealogy confirms him as a legitimate heir to the throne of David. So Jesus’ genealogy in Matthew goes back to Abraham, the father of the Jewish race. By contrast, the genealogy in Luke goes all the way back to Adam. This is consistent with Luke’s emphasis on Jesus as the Savior for all people everywhere.<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew’s genealogy, the unusual mention of women with stained reputations (Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba), some of them Gentiles, is noteworthy and emphasizes God’s grace to redeem even those deemed unworthy by others.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ genealogies do not prove that Jesus is the Messiah, but they do make him a possible candidate. His identity as the Messiah becomes evident in other ways (Matt 11:2-6). God had guided the course of history to its climax. Jesus is the anticipated Messiah of the Old Testament, the Savior of his people, and the King descended from David assuming his throne (see 2 Sam 7:16). He is heir to Abraham and ultimately fulfills God’s promises to Abraham (Gen 12:1-3).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1-3; 2 Sam 7:16; Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38<\/p>","summary_ro":"Genealogy of Jesus Both Matthew and Luke provide genealogies of Jesus (Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38). The two genealogies differ for the generations following King David. Matthew follows the line of David’s son Solomon, while Luke follows the line of David’s son Nathan. One possible explanation is that Matthew records Joseph’s genealogy while Luke records Mary’s (in which case Joseph would have been Heli’s son-in-law). Genealogies were kept quite accurately in Judaism, as Josephus confirms (Jose...","summary_en":"Genealogy of Jesus Both Matthew and Luke provide genealogies of Jesus (Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38). The two genealogies differ for the generations following King David. Matthew follows the line of David’s son Solomon, while Luke follows the line of David’s son Nathan. One possible explanation is that Matthew records Joseph’s genealogy while Luke records Mary’s (in which case Joseph would have been Heli’s son-in-law). Genealogies were kept quite accurately in Judaism, as Josephus confirms (Jose...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120352,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Messiah","title_en":"The Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","summary_en":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120381,"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":147774,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Genealogy of Jesus","title_en":"Genealogy of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Genealogy of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Both Matthew and Luke provide genealogies of Jesus (Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38). The two genealogies differ for the generations following King David. Matthew follows the line of David’s son Solomon, while Luke follows the line of David’s son Nathan. One possible explanation is that Matthew records Joseph’s genealogy while Luke records Mary’s (in which case Joseph would have been Heli’s son-in-law).<\/p>\n<p>Genealogies were kept quite accurately in Judaism, as Josephus confirms (Josephus, <em>Life<\/em> 1). Genealogies were important in the Old Testament and in Judaism generally because land rights were apportioned to families in Israel and because certain offices, such as priest and king, were inherited from father to son. Genealogies sometimes ran a record from the past to the present to illustrate religious themes, family descent, or political ties, as well as simple chronology (1 Chr 1–9). Most such lists were representative rather than a complete list of every individual.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of Matthew’s genealogy, unlike Luke’s, is to show Jesus’ heritage as running from Abraham through David. Jesus’ genealogy confirms him as a legitimate heir to the throne of David. So Jesus’ genealogy in Matthew goes back to Abraham, the father of the Jewish race. By contrast, the genealogy in Luke goes all the way back to Adam. This is consistent with Luke’s emphasis on Jesus as the Savior for all people everywhere.<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew’s genealogy, the unusual mention of women with stained reputations (Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba), some of them Gentiles, is noteworthy and emphasizes God’s grace to redeem even those deemed unworthy by others.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ genealogies do not prove that Jesus is the Messiah, but they do make him a possible candidate. His identity as the Messiah becomes evident in other ways (Matt 11:2-6). God had guided the course of history to its climax. Jesus is the anticipated Messiah of the Old Testament, the Savior of his people, and the King descended from David assuming his throne (see 2 Sam 7:16). He is heir to Abraham and ultimately fulfills God’s promises to Abraham (Gen 12:1-3).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1-3; 2 Sam 7:16; Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Genealogy of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Both Matthew and Luke provide genealogies of Jesus (Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38). The two genealogies differ for the generations following King David. Matthew follows the line of David’s son Solomon, while Luke follows the line of David’s son Nathan. One possible explanation is that Matthew records Joseph’s genealogy while Luke records Mary’s (in which case Joseph would have been Heli’s son-in-law).<\/p>\n<p>Genealogies were kept quite accurately in Judaism, as Josephus confirms (Josephus, <em>Life<\/em> 1). Genealogies were important in the Old Testament and in Judaism generally because land rights were apportioned to families in Israel and because certain offices, such as priest and king, were inherited from father to son. Genealogies sometimes ran a record from the past to the present to illustrate religious themes, family descent, or political ties, as well as simple chronology (1 Chr 1–9). Most such lists were representative rather than a complete list of every individual.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of Matthew’s genealogy, unlike Luke’s, is to show Jesus’ heritage as running from Abraham through David. Jesus’ genealogy confirms him as a legitimate heir to the throne of David. So Jesus’ genealogy in Matthew goes back to Abraham, the father of the Jewish race. By contrast, the genealogy in Luke goes all the way back to Adam. This is consistent with Luke’s emphasis on Jesus as the Savior for all people everywhere.<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew’s genealogy, the unusual mention of women with stained reputations (Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba), some of them Gentiles, is noteworthy and emphasizes God’s grace to redeem even those deemed unworthy by others.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ genealogies do not prove that Jesus is the Messiah, but they do make him a possible candidate. His identity as the Messiah becomes evident in other ways (Matt 11:2-6). God had guided the course of history to its climax. Jesus is the anticipated Messiah of the Old Testament, the Savior of his people, and the King descended from David assuming his throne (see 2 Sam 7:16). He is heir to Abraham and ultimately fulfills God’s promises to Abraham (Gen 12:1-3).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 12:1-3; 2 Sam 7:16; Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38<\/p>","summary_ro":"Genealogy of Jesus Both Matthew and Luke provide genealogies of Jesus (Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38). The two genealogies differ for the generations following King David. Matthew follows the line of David’s son Solomon, while Luke follows the line of David’s son Nathan. One possible explanation is that Matthew records Joseph’s genealogy while Luke records Mary’s (in which case Joseph would have been Heli’s son-in-law). Genealogies were kept quite accurately in Judaism, as Josephus confirms (Jose...","summary_en":"Genealogy of Jesus Both Matthew and Luke provide genealogies of Jesus (Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38). The two genealogies differ for the generations following King David. Matthew follows the line of David’s son Solomon, while Luke follows the line of David’s son Nathan. One possible explanation is that Matthew records Joseph’s genealogy while Luke records Mary’s (in which case Joseph would have been Heli’s son-in-law). Genealogies were kept quite accurately in Judaism, as Josephus confirms (Jose...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147978,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Messiah","title_en":"The Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","summary_en":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148007,"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}],"3":[{"id":20384,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","summary_en":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"4":[{"id":21893,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Kingdom of Heaven Kingdom of God","title_en":"Kingdom of Heaven Kingdom of God","content_ro":"<h3>KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>• In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughout Galilee teaching in the synagogues, preaching everywhere the Good News about the Kingdom” (Mt 4:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Sermon on the Mount is concerned with the righteousness that qualifies people to enter the kingdom of God (5:20). The collection of parables in Matthew 13 and Mark 4 illustrate the “mystery” of the kingdom of God (Mt 13:11; Mk 4:11). The establishment of the Lord’s Supper looks forward to the establishment of the kingdom of God (Mt 26:29; Mk 14:25).<\/p>\n<p>The NT reports two different forms of the expression: “the kingdom of God” and “the kingdom of the heavens.” The latter is found only in Matthew, but Matthew also has “the kingdom of God” four times (Mt 12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43). “The kingdom of heaven” is a Semitic phrase that would have been meaningful to Jews but not to Greeks. The Jews, out of reverence for God, avoided uttering the divine name, and contemporary literature gives examples of substituting the word “heaven” for God (1 Macc 3:18, 50; 4:10; see Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>The key to an understanding of the kingdom of God is that the basic meaning of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span><em>,<\/em> as also of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>,<\/em> is rule, reign, dominion. We frequently find in the OT the expression “in the year of the kingdom of . . . ,” meaning in the year of the reign of a given king (e.g., 1 Chr 26:31; 2 Chr 3:2; 15:10; Ezr 7:1; 8:1; Est 2:16; Jer 10:7; 52:31). When we read that Solomon’s kingdom was firmly established (1 Kgs 2:12), we are to understand that his authority to reign was settled. To “turn the kingdom of Saul over to [David]” (1 Chr 12:23, <span>kjv<\/span>) indicates that the authority that had been Saul’s was given to David. As a result of having received legal authority, David became king. This abstract idea of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is evident when it is found in parallelisms with such ideas as power, might, glory, and dominion (Dn 4:34; 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>When <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is used of God, it almost always refers to his authority or to his rule as the heavenly King. “They will talk together about the glory of your kingdom; they will celebrate examples of your power. . . . For your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. You rule generation after generation” (Ps 145:11, 13, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Further, if a king rules, there must be a realm or sphere over which he reigns. This is also called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>.<\/em> “So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet, for his God gave him rest round about” (2 Chr 20:30, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Est 3:6; Jer 10:7; Dn 9:1; 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>This same twofold use of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> is found in the NT. In fact, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> could be translated by the expression “kingly power” in Luke 23:42 (<span>niv<\/span> mg) and by “kingship” in John 18:36. When a nobleman went into a far country to get a “kingdom” (Luke 19:12, <span>nasb<\/span>) he went to the governing authority to get an appointment as king. When Jesus said, “My kingship is not of this world” (Jn 18:36, <span>rsv<\/span>), he did not mean to say that his rule has nothing to do with the world but rather that his kingship—his dominion—does not come from man but from God. Therefore, he rejects the use of worldly fighting to gain his ends.<\/p>\n<p>This central meaning of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> makes it easy to understand many sayings in the Gospels. In the Lord’s Prayer the petition “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10) is a prayer for God to manifest his reign so that his will may be done on earth as it is in heaven. When we read that we are to “receive the kingdom of God like a child” (Mk 10:15, <span>rsv<\/span>), we must open our hearts and lives to the rule of God.<\/p>\n<p>Also in the NT are sayings about being <em>in<\/em> the kingdom or of <em>entering<\/em> the kingdom (Mt 8:11; Mk 9:47; 10:23-25; Lk 13:28). There is no philological or theological objection to understanding “the kingdom of God” first as the divine reign or rule and second as the sphere of blessing in which that reign is experienced.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentBackground\">Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>The expression “the kingdom of God” is not found in the OT, but the idea appears throughout the prophets. God is frequently spoken of as the King, both of Israel (Ex 15:18; Nm 23:21; Dt 33:5; Is 43:15) and of all the earth (2 Kgs 19:15; Pss 29:10; 47:2; 93:1-2; 96:10; 97:1-9; 99:1-4; 145:11-13; Is 6:5; Jer 46:18). Although God is not the earthly King of Israel, other references speak of a day when God shall become King and shall rule over his people (Is 24:23; 33:22; 52:7; Ob 1:21; Zep 3:15; Zec 14:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>This brief summary of God’s kingship provides the outline for the entire OT concept. While God is King over all the earth, he is in a special way King over his people, Israel. God’s rule is therefore something realized in Israel’s history. However, it is only partially and imperfectly realized. Israel again and again rebelled against the divine sovereignty. Furthermore, Israel was constantly plagued by wars with its pagan neighbors in which it was not always victorious. Again, there are evils in nature and the physical world that often bring suffering to God’s people. Therefore, the prophets look forward to a day when God’s rule will be fully experienced, not by Israel alone, but by all the world. The main emphasis of the prophets is on hope, the establishing of God’s perfect rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets describe the final establishment of God’s kingdom in terms of a theophany—a divine visitation (Mi 1:3-4). Zechariah foresees a “Day of the Lord” when all nations will be gathered in battle against Jerusalem, when the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations (Zec 14:3, 5). Israel will be visited by the Lord (Is 29:6) and delivered from its enemies (35:4; 59:20). God’s coming will also mean judgment (2:21; 26:21). This final coming of God will mean the salvation of the Gentiles as well as of Israel (Zec 2:10-11; cf. Is 66:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>Behind this language is a distinct theology of “the God who comes.” It is a fact widely recognized in contemporary OT theology that the God of the OT is not a nature god, like the gods of other peoples, but a God of history—a God who visits his people in history to bless or to judge them. God visited Israel in Egypt to deliver them from bondage and to constitute them as his people. The rescue from Egypt was not merely an act of deliverance; it was an act through which God made himself known and through which Israel was to know and serve him.<\/p>\n<p>Because God has visited his people again and again in their history, he must finally come to them in the future to judge wickedness and to establish his kingdom. Israel’s hope is thus rooted in history, or rather in the God who works in history. God will finally break into history in a glorious theophany to establish his rule in all the earth. The source of the kingdom is not history itself but God.<\/p>\n<p>While the prophets visualize the kingdom as coming from God, the kingdom is always on earth. The divine irruption into the natural order is not designed to accomplish its destruction but to make way for a new, perfect order arising out of the old, imperfect one. The prophets do not present a single consistent picture of the new order. Sometimes the new order is described very much in this-worldly terms. “The terraced vineyards on the hills of Israel will drip with sweet wine” (Am 9:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). On the other hand, God will create new heavens and a new earth (Is 65:17; 66:22), where there will be untroubled joy, prosperity, peace, and righteousness. The final visitation of God will mean the redemption of the world, for a redeemed earth is the scene of the kingdom of God. The prophets look forward again and again to the deliverance of creation “from the bondage to decay.” The description is often couched in simple physical terms. The wilderness will become fruitful (32:15); the desert will blossom (35:2); sorrow and sighing will flee away (v 10). The burning sands will be cooled and the dry places become springs of water (v 7); peace will return to the animal world so that all injury and destruction are done away with (11:6). All this results because the earth becomes full of the knowledge of God (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Such language is not mere poetry but reflects a profound theology of creation. Humans as creatures were made to dwell on the earth, and the earth shares in human destiny. The main point is that creation as such is good and not a hindrance to true spirituality, as was often true in Greek thought. Redemption always includes redemption of the earth, which then becomes the blessed environment God intended it to be. Salvation does not mean deliverance from creaturehood, for this is not an evil thing but an essential and permanent element of true, human existence. Salvation does not mean escape from bodily creaturely existence, as in some Greek thought. On the contrary, ultimate redemption will mean the redemption of the whole person. The emergence of the doctrine of bodily resurrection is a reflection of this theology of creaturehood. The corollary of this is that creation in its entirety must share in the blessing of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>A distinctive element in prophetic eschatology is the tension between history and eschatology. That is, as the prophets looked into the future, they saw an immediate historical judgment as well as a more remote eschatological visitation. For Amos, the Day of the Lord is both the immediate judgment of Israel by the Assyrians and a final eschatological salvation. Joel sees an imminent historical visitation of drought and locusts, but beyond this he sees the eschatological Day of the Lord. Zephaniah sees an imminent Day of the Lord in some undesignated historical visitation (Zep 1:2-18), but beyond it he sees the salvation of the Gentiles (3:9). The same God who acts in history to bless and judge his people will act at the end of history in an eschatological act of judgment and salvation. The prophets do not sharply distinguish between these two days, for it is one and the same God who is concerned to judge and save his people.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological hope of the prophets is always an ethical hope. That is to say, the prophets are not interested in the future for its own sake but for the impact of the future on the present. The prophetic predictions were given that, in light of future judgment and salvation, Israel might be confronted in the present by the will of God. “Prepare to meet your God as he comes in judgment, you people of Israel” (Am 4:12, <span>nlt<\/span>) might well be taken as the keynote of all the prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom of God embodied the same contrast between the present order and the future age as that of the prophets, and he expressed it in the idiom “this age and the age to come.” This fact is obscured in the <span>kjv<\/span>, which translates the word for “age” by “world.” These are, however, two different concepts. A rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). The context makes it clear that he was asking about eschatological life—the life of the resurrection (Dn 12:2). Jesus speaks of the difficulty of entering the kingdom of God. (The parallel passage in Matthew 19:23-24 has both “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven,” proving that they are interchangeable terms.) In their reaction the disciples ask, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus’ answer contrasts the lot of his disciples “in this time” with the “age to come” (Mk 10:29-30) when they would inherit eternal life. It is clear from this passage that in some sense the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, salvation, and eternal life all belong to the age to come. So far as this saying is concerned, God’s people will not experience eternal life until they do so in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew alone records the expression “the close of the age.” This age will be terminated by the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 24:3) and by the judgment of humanity (13:39-42). Then the righteous will be separated from the wicked (v 49). The same expression occurs in the promise of the risen Jesus assuring his disciples of his presence until the consummation of the age (28:20). It follows that if this age is to come to its consummation, it must be followed by another age—the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological kingdom will be inaugurated by an apocalyptic event—the glorious coming of the Son of Man. This is made clear by two of the parables about the kingdom of God. In the parable of the tares, “the Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire” (Mt 13:41-42, <span>rsv<\/span>). The parable of the sheep and goats reflects the same eschatology. When the Son of Man comes in his glory, he will sit on his glorious throne to judge the nations, separating the sheep from the goats. The righteous—the sheep—are to “inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world”; and entrance into the kingdom is synonymous with entrance into life (25:31-46, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological character of the kingdom of God is seen also in the other two parables of Matthew 25. “The kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom” (v 1, <span>rsv<\/span>). However, five of them were foolish and did not provide an adequate supply of oil for their lamps. Thus they were late for the wedding and were excluded from the wedding feast—a symbol of the eschatological kingdom—while those properly prepared entered the kingdom. In the same way the two faithful servants who had been “faithful over a little” were granted to “enter into the joy of your master” (vv 21, 23), while the unfaithful servant was excluded from the kingdom and cast into outer darkness.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus almost never showed any interest in descriptions of the eschatological kingdom, but it is clear that its coming was constantly in his thoughts. The pure in heart will see God (Mt 5:8). The harvest will take place and the grain will be gathered into the barn (13:30, 39; Mk 4:29). Jesus frequently used the metaphor of a feast or table fellowship to describe life in the eschatological kingdom. He will drink wine again with his disciples in the kingdom of God. They will eat and drink at Jesus’ table in the kingdom (Lk 22:30). People will be gathered from all corners of the earth to sit at a table with the OT saints (Mt 8:11-12; Lk 13:29). The consummation is likened to a wedding feast (Mt 22:1-14) and a banquet (Lk 14:16-24). All of these metaphors picture the restoration of communion between God and people, a union that had been broken by sin.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the sayings cited to illustrate the future character of the kingdom, “kingdom” refers to the eschatological order—the eschaton, the age to come. However, when Jesus taught his disciples to pray “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10), he was not referring to the new eschatological order; he was referring to the kingdom as God’s kingly rule, his reign. It is a prayer that God will effectively establish his sovereign rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>In his teaching about the kingdom of God as the apocalyptic consummation, Jesus does not differ essentially from the OT prophets. The most distinctive element in Jesus’ teaching—indeed, the fact that characterizes his entire mission and message—is the fact that in some real sense of the word, the kingdom of God has come in history in an utterly unexpected way. This sets Jesus’ teaching apart from all contemporary Jewish thought.<\/p>\n<p>This is seen first of all in his repeated teaching that his mission is a fulfillment of the OT messianic prophets. Mark summarizes Jesus’ message with the words “The Kingdom of God is near! Turn from your sins and believe this Good News!” (Mk 1:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). This saying can have one of two meanings. It may refer to the imminent coming of the apocalyptic kingdom. Matthew summarizes the message of John the Baptist with nearly the same words: “Turn from your sins and turn to God, because the Kingdom of Heaven is near” (Mt 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Baptist expounds what he means by the approach of the kingdom of God: “He is ready to separate the chaff from the grain with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, storing the grain in his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). John proclaimed an apocalyptic act; “unquenchable fire” can mean no strictly historical event but only an apocalyptic judgment. John expected Jesus to be the one in whom the cosmic event expected by the prophets would be carried out.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that this was also Jesus’ meaning. However, another interpretation is possible that is better supported by the actual course of his mission: “The time is fulfilled.” The messianic promises of the prophets were not only about to be fulfilled; they were actually in process of fulfillment in his mission. In Jesus, God was visiting his people. The hope of the prophets in some real sense was being realized.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of this can be seen in Luke’s introduction of Jesus’ ministry. Luke selects an event that occurred in Nazareth later in Jesus’ ministry (Lk 4:16-21) and places it at the beginning of his Gospel in order to sound this note of fulfillment. Jesus read from Isaiah a promise that looked forward to the messianic salvation: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he has appointed me to preach Good News to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released, that the blind will see, that the downtrodden will be freed from their oppressors, and that the time of the Lord’s favor has come” (vv 18-19, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then Jesus astonished his audience by the assertion “This Scripture has come true today before your very eyes!” (v 21, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Here was an amazing claim. John the Baptist had announced an apocalyptic visitation of God that would mean the fulfillment of the eschatological hope and the consummation of the messianic age. Jesus proclaimed that the messianic promise was actually being fulfilled in his person. This is no apocalyptic kingdom but a present salvation. In these words Jesus did not proclaim the imminence of the apocalyptic kingdom. Rather, he boldly announced that the kingdom of God had come. The presence of the kingdom was a happening, an event, the gracious action of God. This was no new theology or new idea or new promise; it was a new event in history.<\/p>\n<p>The note of fulfillment is again sounded in Jesus’ answer to the question about fasting. “Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can’t fast while they are with the groom” (Mk 2:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). The marriage feast had become a metaphor in Judaism for the messianic consummation. In these words Jesus announced the presence of the messianic time of salvation. It would be a contradiction in terms for the disciples to fast when they were enjoying the blessings of the messianic age. The time of fulfillment had come.<\/p>\n<p>A saying found in different contexts in Matthew and Luke touches this central note of the fulfillment in history of the OT hope: “Blessed are the eyes which see what you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it” (Lk 10:23-24, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 13:16-17). Both Matthew and Luke associate this saying with the kingdom of God, and both agree that the hope of former generations has become an object of experience. Many prophets and kings looked forward to something, but they looked in vain, for it did not come to them. What they longed for has now come, and this can be nothing less than the promised messianic salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Fulfillment in history is again asserted in Jesus’ answer to John’s question about the one who is to come (Mt 11:2-3). “The deeds of the Christ” (Messiah) were not the deeds John had announced. Wicked rulers like Herod were not being judged in fire. Instead, Jesus was helping people, not bringing an apocalyptic kingdom. Jesus replied in words that echo the promise of the messianic salvation in Isaiah 35:5-6: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Mt 11:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). In these words Jesus claimed that the blessings of the messianic salvation are present. There was indeed reason for John’s perplexity, for the fulfillment was not taking place along expected lines. The apocalyptic consummation did not appear to be on the horizon. The point of Jesus’ answer was that fulfillment was taking place without the eschatological consummation. Therefore, Jesus pronounced a special blessing upon those who were not offended by the character of the messianic fulfillment (v 6). The fulfillment was indeed taking place, but not the apocalyptic consummation.<\/p>\n<p>The most unambiguous statement of the presence of the kingdom is found in the words about the binding of Satan. One of Jesus’ most characteristic acts was the exorcism of demons—deliverance from satanic power. The Pharisees admitted his power but attributed it to Satan. Jesus replied, “If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? . . . But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God is come upon you” (Mt 12:26, 28, <span>rsv<\/span>). Here the verb has the clear meaning “to come, to arrive” (cf. Rom 9:30; 2 Cor 10:14; Phil 3:16). Here is a clear affirmation that the kingdom of God has come among men.<\/p>\n<p>In explanation Jesus said, “Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house” (Mt 12:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). The strong man is Satan; this “present evil age” (Gal 1:4) is his “house”; his “goods” are demon-possessed men and women. Jesus has invaded the strong man’s house to snatch away from him men and women whom he has in his power, and this is the work of the kingdom of God. The kingly reign of God has come into history in the person of Jesus before the apocalyptic consummation when Satan will be destroyed, to render Satan a preliminary defeat. Jesus has already “bound” Satan (i.e., curbed his power). This has been accomplished by the presence of the kingdom of God in the mission of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A similar saying is found in Luke 10:18. Jesus had sent a band of his disciples on a preaching mission. Like Jesus, they were to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom of God (Lk 10:9). They, too, were to exorcize demons. When they returned to Jesus to report their success, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>). This again is metaphorical language that asserts that in the mission of Jesus’ disciples, as well as in Jesus himself, Satan has fallen from his place of power. Both “binding” and “falling” are metaphors that describe the same truth: the victory of the kingdom of God over Satan.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the element that sets Jesus apart from the OT and from all of contemporary Judaism. The prophets conceived of the kingdom being established by a heavenly supernatural being (Dn 7) or ruled by a powerful Davidic messianic king (Is 9, 11). The fulfillment of the messianic hope is everywhere in the prophets an eschatological hope. The same is true of the Jewish writers who despaired of history and cast all hope into the future.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to all that had gone before him, Jesus proclaimed the kingdom of God as an event taking place in his own person and mission. God had again assumed the initiative; God was acting. No first-century Jew had any idea of the kingdom of God coming into history in the person of an ordinary man—a teacher who was meek and lowly.<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the kingdom is further seen in the fact that the rule of God, present in Jesus, is a gift to be received. This is also true of the kingdom in its eschatological consummation, where the kingdom is freely inherited by the righteous (Mt 25:34). In answer to the young man’s question about inheriting eternal life (Mk 10:17), Jesus spoke of entering the kingdom (vv 23-24) and receiving the gift of eternal life (v 30) as though they were synonymous. The kingdom is a gift that the Father is pleased to bestow upon the little flock of Jesus’ disciples (Lk 12:32).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s eschatological rule brings to his people the blessings of that kingdom, and if God’s kingdom is his rule invading history before the eschatological consummation, then we may expect God’s rule in the present to bring a preliminary blessing to his people. This fact is reflected in numerous sayings. The kingdom is something to be sought here and now (Mt 6:33) and to be received as children receive a gift (Mk 10:15; Lk 18:16-17). Although it is present in an unexpected form, the kingdom of God in Jesus’ person is like a hidden treasure or a pearl of great price whose possession outranks all other goods (Mt 13:44-46). The gift of the kingdom is also seen in that the deaf hear, the blind see, lepers are cleansed, and the poor have good news preached to them (11:5).<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>In the Gospel of John the concept of eternal life takes the place of the kingdom of God in Jesus’ teaching. The kingdom of God is mentioned twice (Jn 3:3, 5), and it is placed in connection with eternal life. The kingdom of God is here the eschatological kingdom, and eternal life is the life of the kingdom. Thus, as the kingdom of God in the synoptic Gospels is both future and present, so eternal life is both the life of the age to come (12:25) and also a present blessing (3:16, etc.).<\/p>\n<h5>Acts<\/h5>\n<p>In Acts it seems the earliest disciples generally failed to understand Jesus’ message about the kingdom of God as a present spiritual blessing. They gathered together to await the coming of the eschatological kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6). Acts relates that the disciples continued to preach the kingdom of God, but usually it is an eschatological blessing (8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). However, the last two references make the kingdom of God synonymous with the gospel about Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>One important theme in Acts is linked to that of the kingdom of God. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter announces that God has seated Jesus at his right hand in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1 (Acts 2:33-35). In the Psalms this is a prophecy of the enthronement of the Davidic king in Jerusalem. Peter asserts that this prophecy is now fulfilled in the heavenly reign of Jesus. Therefore, he has been made both Lord and Christ (Messiah). These are interchangeable terms, “Lord” meaning absolute sovereign, “Christ” meaning the messianic king.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>Paul carried further this theme of the heavenly rule of Christ, the anointed King. The kingdom is both an eschatological inheritance (1 Cor 6:9; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; 1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 1:5; 2 Tm 4:1, 18) and a present blessing into which believers now enter (Rom 14:17; Col 1:13). The key to this is the interchangeable character of lordship and messianic kingship. Jesus is now exalted as Lord over all (Phil 2:11), and even as his lordship is invisible, it will become manifest to all at his second coming. In the same way, he has been enthroned as messianic King by virtue of his resurrection and heavenly session, and he must reign as King until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:22). The last enemy to be destroyed is death.<\/p>\n<h5>Revelation<\/h5>\n<p>The central message of the Revelation to John is the consummation of God’s redemptive purpose, when the kingdom of this world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Revelation pictures the plight of a persecuted church in a hostile world, but it assures the church that Christ has already won a victory over the powers of evil (5:5), by virtue of which he can finally destroy them (19:11–20:14). Again, the last enemy to be destroyed is death (20:13-14). Revelation closes with a highly symbolic picture of the kingdom of God (chs 21–22) when God comes to dwell among his people, and “they shall see his face” (22:4). Thus the NT ends: divine order is restored to a disordered world. This is the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Teachings of; King; Parable.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>• In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughout Galilee teaching in the synagogues, preaching everywhere the Good News about the Kingdom” (Mt 4:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Sermon on the Mount is concerned with the righteousness that qualifies people to enter the kingdom of God (5:20). The collection of parables in Matthew 13 and Mark 4 illustrate the “mystery” of the kingdom of God (Mt 13:11; Mk 4:11). The establishment of the Lord’s Supper looks forward to the establishment of the kingdom of God (Mt 26:29; Mk 14:25).<\/p>\n<p>The NT reports two different forms of the expression: “the kingdom of God” and “the kingdom of the heavens.” The latter is found only in Matthew, but Matthew also has “the kingdom of God” four times (Mt 12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43). “The kingdom of heaven” is a Semitic phrase that would have been meaningful to Jews but not to Greeks. The Jews, out of reverence for God, avoided uttering the divine name, and contemporary literature gives examples of substituting the word “heaven” for God (1 Macc 3:18, 50; 4:10; see Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>The key to an understanding of the kingdom of God is that the basic meaning of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span><em>,<\/em> as also of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>,<\/em> is rule, reign, dominion. We frequently find in the OT the expression “in the year of the kingdom of . . . ,” meaning in the year of the reign of a given king (e.g., 1 Chr 26:31; 2 Chr 3:2; 15:10; Ezr 7:1; 8:1; Est 2:16; Jer 10:7; 52:31). When we read that Solomon’s kingdom was firmly established (1 Kgs 2:12), we are to understand that his authority to reign was settled. To “turn the kingdom of Saul over to [David]” (1 Chr 12:23, <span>kjv<\/span>) indicates that the authority that had been Saul’s was given to David. As a result of having received legal authority, David became king. This abstract idea of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is evident when it is found in parallelisms with such ideas as power, might, glory, and dominion (Dn 4:34; 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>When <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is used of God, it almost always refers to his authority or to his rule as the heavenly King. “They will talk together about the glory of your kingdom; they will celebrate examples of your power. . . . For your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. You rule generation after generation” (Ps 145:11, 13, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Further, if a king rules, there must be a realm or sphere over which he reigns. This is also called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>.<\/em> “So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet, for his God gave him rest round about” (2 Chr 20:30, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Est 3:6; Jer 10:7; Dn 9:1; 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>This same twofold use of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> is found in the NT. In fact, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> could be translated by the expression “kingly power” in Luke 23:42 (<span>niv<\/span> mg) and by “kingship” in John 18:36. When a nobleman went into a far country to get a “kingdom” (Luke 19:12, <span>nasb<\/span>) he went to the governing authority to get an appointment as king. When Jesus said, “My kingship is not of this world” (Jn 18:36, <span>rsv<\/span>), he did not mean to say that his rule has nothing to do with the world but rather that his kingship—his dominion—does not come from man but from God. Therefore, he rejects the use of worldly fighting to gain his ends.<\/p>\n<p>This central meaning of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> makes it easy to understand many sayings in the Gospels. In the Lord’s Prayer the petition “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10) is a prayer for God to manifest his reign so that his will may be done on earth as it is in heaven. When we read that we are to “receive the kingdom of God like a child” (Mk 10:15, <span>rsv<\/span>), we must open our hearts and lives to the rule of God.<\/p>\n<p>Also in the NT are sayings about being <em>in<\/em> the kingdom or of <em>entering<\/em> the kingdom (Mt 8:11; Mk 9:47; 10:23-25; Lk 13:28). There is no philological or theological objection to understanding “the kingdom of God” first as the divine reign or rule and second as the sphere of blessing in which that reign is experienced.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentBackground\">Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>The expression “the kingdom of God” is not found in the OT, but the idea appears throughout the prophets. God is frequently spoken of as the King, both of Israel (Ex 15:18; Nm 23:21; Dt 33:5; Is 43:15) and of all the earth (2 Kgs 19:15; Pss 29:10; 47:2; 93:1-2; 96:10; 97:1-9; 99:1-4; 145:11-13; Is 6:5; Jer 46:18). Although God is not the earthly King of Israel, other references speak of a day when God shall become King and shall rule over his people (Is 24:23; 33:22; 52:7; Ob 1:21; Zep 3:15; Zec 14:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>This brief summary of God’s kingship provides the outline for the entire OT concept. While God is King over all the earth, he is in a special way King over his people, Israel. God’s rule is therefore something realized in Israel’s history. However, it is only partially and imperfectly realized. Israel again and again rebelled against the divine sovereignty. Furthermore, Israel was constantly plagued by wars with its pagan neighbors in which it was not always victorious. Again, there are evils in nature and the physical world that often bring suffering to God’s people. Therefore, the prophets look forward to a day when God’s rule will be fully experienced, not by Israel alone, but by all the world. The main emphasis of the prophets is on hope, the establishing of God’s perfect rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets describe the final establishment of God’s kingdom in terms of a theophany—a divine visitation (Mi 1:3-4). Zechariah foresees a “Day of the Lord” when all nations will be gathered in battle against Jerusalem, when the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations (Zec 14:3, 5). Israel will be visited by the Lord (Is 29:6) and delivered from its enemies (35:4; 59:20). God’s coming will also mean judgment (2:21; 26:21). This final coming of God will mean the salvation of the Gentiles as well as of Israel (Zec 2:10-11; cf. Is 66:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>Behind this language is a distinct theology of “the God who comes.” It is a fact widely recognized in contemporary OT theology that the God of the OT is not a nature god, like the gods of other peoples, but a God of history—a God who visits his people in history to bless or to judge them. God visited Israel in Egypt to deliver them from bondage and to constitute them as his people. The rescue from Egypt was not merely an act of deliverance; it was an act through which God made himself known and through which Israel was to know and serve him.<\/p>\n<p>Because God has visited his people again and again in their history, he must finally come to them in the future to judge wickedness and to establish his kingdom. Israel’s hope is thus rooted in history, or rather in the God who works in history. God will finally break into history in a glorious theophany to establish his rule in all the earth. The source of the kingdom is not history itself but God.<\/p>\n<p>While the prophets visualize the kingdom as coming from God, the kingdom is always on earth. The divine irruption into the natural order is not designed to accomplish its destruction but to make way for a new, perfect order arising out of the old, imperfect one. The prophets do not present a single consistent picture of the new order. Sometimes the new order is described very much in this-worldly terms. “The terraced vineyards on the hills of Israel will drip with sweet wine” (Am 9:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). On the other hand, God will create new heavens and a new earth (Is 65:17; 66:22), where there will be untroubled joy, prosperity, peace, and righteousness. The final visitation of God will mean the redemption of the world, for a redeemed earth is the scene of the kingdom of God. The prophets look forward again and again to the deliverance of creation “from the bondage to decay.” The description is often couched in simple physical terms. The wilderness will become fruitful (32:15); the desert will blossom (35:2); sorrow and sighing will flee away (v 10). The burning sands will be cooled and the dry places become springs of water (v 7); peace will return to the animal world so that all injury and destruction are done away with (11:6). All this results because the earth becomes full of the knowledge of God (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Such language is not mere poetry but reflects a profound theology of creation. Humans as creatures were made to dwell on the earth, and the earth shares in human destiny. The main point is that creation as such is good and not a hindrance to true spirituality, as was often true in Greek thought. Redemption always includes redemption of the earth, which then becomes the blessed environment God intended it to be. Salvation does not mean deliverance from creaturehood, for this is not an evil thing but an essential and permanent element of true, human existence. Salvation does not mean escape from bodily creaturely existence, as in some Greek thought. On the contrary, ultimate redemption will mean the redemption of the whole person. The emergence of the doctrine of bodily resurrection is a reflection of this theology of creaturehood. The corollary of this is that creation in its entirety must share in the blessing of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>A distinctive element in prophetic eschatology is the tension between history and eschatology. That is, as the prophets looked into the future, they saw an immediate historical judgment as well as a more remote eschatological visitation. For Amos, the Day of the Lord is both the immediate judgment of Israel by the Assyrians and a final eschatological salvation. Joel sees an imminent historical visitation of drought and locusts, but beyond this he sees the eschatological Day of the Lord. Zephaniah sees an imminent Day of the Lord in some undesignated historical visitation (Zep 1:2-18), but beyond it he sees the salvation of the Gentiles (3:9). The same God who acts in history to bless and judge his people will act at the end of history in an eschatological act of judgment and salvation. The prophets do not sharply distinguish between these two days, for it is one and the same God who is concerned to judge and save his people.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological hope of the prophets is always an ethical hope. That is to say, the prophets are not interested in the future for its own sake but for the impact of the future on the present. The prophetic predictions were given that, in light of future judgment and salvation, Israel might be confronted in the present by the will of God. “Prepare to meet your God as he comes in judgment, you people of Israel” (Am 4:12, <span>nlt<\/span>) might well be taken as the keynote of all the prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom of God embodied the same contrast between the present order and the future age as that of the prophets, and he expressed it in the idiom “this age and the age to come.” This fact is obscured in the <span>kjv<\/span>, which translates the word for “age” by “world.” These are, however, two different concepts. A rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). The context makes it clear that he was asking about eschatological life—the life of the resurrection (Dn 12:2). Jesus speaks of the difficulty of entering the kingdom of God. (The parallel passage in Matthew 19:23-24 has both “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven,” proving that they are interchangeable terms.) In their reaction the disciples ask, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus’ answer contrasts the lot of his disciples “in this time” with the “age to come” (Mk 10:29-30) when they would inherit eternal life. It is clear from this passage that in some sense the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, salvation, and eternal life all belong to the age to come. So far as this saying is concerned, God’s people will not experience eternal life until they do so in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew alone records the expression “the close of the age.” This age will be terminated by the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 24:3) and by the judgment of humanity (13:39-42). Then the righteous will be separated from the wicked (v 49). The same expression occurs in the promise of the risen Jesus assuring his disciples of his presence until the consummation of the age (28:20). It follows that if this age is to come to its consummation, it must be followed by another age—the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological kingdom will be inaugurated by an apocalyptic event—the glorious coming of the Son of Man. This is made clear by two of the parables about the kingdom of God. In the parable of the tares, “the Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire” (Mt 13:41-42, <span>rsv<\/span>). The parable of the sheep and goats reflects the same eschatology. When the Son of Man comes in his glory, he will sit on his glorious throne to judge the nations, separating the sheep from the goats. The righteous—the sheep—are to “inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world”; and entrance into the kingdom is synonymous with entrance into life (25:31-46, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological character of the kingdom of God is seen also in the other two parables of Matthew 25. “The kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom” (v 1, <span>rsv<\/span>). However, five of them were foolish and did not provide an adequate supply of oil for their lamps. Thus they were late for the wedding and were excluded from the wedding feast—a symbol of the eschatological kingdom—while those properly prepared entered the kingdom. In the same way the two faithful servants who had been “faithful over a little” were granted to “enter into the joy of your master” (vv 21, 23), while the unfaithful servant was excluded from the kingdom and cast into outer darkness.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus almost never showed any interest in descriptions of the eschatological kingdom, but it is clear that its coming was constantly in his thoughts. The pure in heart will see God (Mt 5:8). The harvest will take place and the grain will be gathered into the barn (13:30, 39; Mk 4:29). Jesus frequently used the metaphor of a feast or table fellowship to describe life in the eschatological kingdom. He will drink wine again with his disciples in the kingdom of God. They will eat and drink at Jesus’ table in the kingdom (Lk 22:30). People will be gathered from all corners of the earth to sit at a table with the OT saints (Mt 8:11-12; Lk 13:29). The consummation is likened to a wedding feast (Mt 22:1-14) and a banquet (Lk 14:16-24). All of these metaphors picture the restoration of communion between God and people, a union that had been broken by sin.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the sayings cited to illustrate the future character of the kingdom, “kingdom” refers to the eschatological order—the eschaton, the age to come. However, when Jesus taught his disciples to pray “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10), he was not referring to the new eschatological order; he was referring to the kingdom as God’s kingly rule, his reign. It is a prayer that God will effectively establish his sovereign rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>In his teaching about the kingdom of God as the apocalyptic consummation, Jesus does not differ essentially from the OT prophets. The most distinctive element in Jesus’ teaching—indeed, the fact that characterizes his entire mission and message—is the fact that in some real sense of the word, the kingdom of God has come in history in an utterly unexpected way. This sets Jesus’ teaching apart from all contemporary Jewish thought.<\/p>\n<p>This is seen first of all in his repeated teaching that his mission is a fulfillment of the OT messianic prophets. Mark summarizes Jesus’ message with the words “The Kingdom of God is near! Turn from your sins and believe this Good News!” (Mk 1:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). This saying can have one of two meanings. It may refer to the imminent coming of the apocalyptic kingdom. Matthew summarizes the message of John the Baptist with nearly the same words: “Turn from your sins and turn to God, because the Kingdom of Heaven is near” (Mt 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Baptist expounds what he means by the approach of the kingdom of God: “He is ready to separate the chaff from the grain with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, storing the grain in his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). John proclaimed an apocalyptic act; “unquenchable fire” can mean no strictly historical event but only an apocalyptic judgment. John expected Jesus to be the one in whom the cosmic event expected by the prophets would be carried out.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that this was also Jesus’ meaning. However, another interpretation is possible that is better supported by the actual course of his mission: “The time is fulfilled.” The messianic promises of the prophets were not only about to be fulfilled; they were actually in process of fulfillment in his mission. In Jesus, God was visiting his people. The hope of the prophets in some real sense was being realized.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of this can be seen in Luke’s introduction of Jesus’ ministry. Luke selects an event that occurred in Nazareth later in Jesus’ ministry (Lk 4:16-21) and places it at the beginning of his Gospel in order to sound this note of fulfillment. Jesus read from Isaiah a promise that looked forward to the messianic salvation: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he has appointed me to preach Good News to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released, that the blind will see, that the downtrodden will be freed from their oppressors, and that the time of the Lord’s favor has come” (vv 18-19, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then Jesus astonished his audience by the assertion “This Scripture has come true today before your very eyes!” (v 21, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Here was an amazing claim. John the Baptist had announced an apocalyptic visitation of God that would mean the fulfillment of the eschatological hope and the consummation of the messianic age. Jesus proclaimed that the messianic promise was actually being fulfilled in his person. This is no apocalyptic kingdom but a present salvation. In these words Jesus did not proclaim the imminence of the apocalyptic kingdom. Rather, he boldly announced that the kingdom of God had come. The presence of the kingdom was a happening, an event, the gracious action of God. This was no new theology or new idea or new promise; it was a new event in history.<\/p>\n<p>The note of fulfillment is again sounded in Jesus’ answer to the question about fasting. “Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can’t fast while they are with the groom” (Mk 2:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). The marriage feast had become a metaphor in Judaism for the messianic consummation. In these words Jesus announced the presence of the messianic time of salvation. It would be a contradiction in terms for the disciples to fast when they were enjoying the blessings of the messianic age. The time of fulfillment had come.<\/p>\n<p>A saying found in different contexts in Matthew and Luke touches this central note of the fulfillment in history of the OT hope: “Blessed are the eyes which see what you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it” (Lk 10:23-24, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 13:16-17). Both Matthew and Luke associate this saying with the kingdom of God, and both agree that the hope of former generations has become an object of experience. Many prophets and kings looked forward to something, but they looked in vain, for it did not come to them. What they longed for has now come, and this can be nothing less than the promised messianic salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Fulfillment in history is again asserted in Jesus’ answer to John’s question about the one who is to come (Mt 11:2-3). “The deeds of the Christ” (Messiah) were not the deeds John had announced. Wicked rulers like Herod were not being judged in fire. Instead, Jesus was helping people, not bringing an apocalyptic kingdom. Jesus replied in words that echo the promise of the messianic salvation in Isaiah 35:5-6: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Mt 11:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). In these words Jesus claimed that the blessings of the messianic salvation are present. There was indeed reason for John’s perplexity, for the fulfillment was not taking place along expected lines. The apocalyptic consummation did not appear to be on the horizon. The point of Jesus’ answer was that fulfillment was taking place without the eschatological consummation. Therefore, Jesus pronounced a special blessing upon those who were not offended by the character of the messianic fulfillment (v 6). The fulfillment was indeed taking place, but not the apocalyptic consummation.<\/p>\n<p>The most unambiguous statement of the presence of the kingdom is found in the words about the binding of Satan. One of Jesus’ most characteristic acts was the exorcism of demons—deliverance from satanic power. The Pharisees admitted his power but attributed it to Satan. Jesus replied, “If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? . . . But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God is come upon you” (Mt 12:26, 28, <span>rsv<\/span>). Here the verb has the clear meaning “to come, to arrive” (cf. Rom 9:30; 2 Cor 10:14; Phil 3:16). Here is a clear affirmation that the kingdom of God has come among men.<\/p>\n<p>In explanation Jesus said, “Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house” (Mt 12:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). The strong man is Satan; this “present evil age” (Gal 1:4) is his “house”; his “goods” are demon-possessed men and women. Jesus has invaded the strong man’s house to snatch away from him men and women whom he has in his power, and this is the work of the kingdom of God. The kingly reign of God has come into history in the person of Jesus before the apocalyptic consummation when Satan will be destroyed, to render Satan a preliminary defeat. Jesus has already “bound” Satan (i.e., curbed his power). This has been accomplished by the presence of the kingdom of God in the mission of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A similar saying is found in Luke 10:18. Jesus had sent a band of his disciples on a preaching mission. Like Jesus, they were to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom of God (Lk 10:9). They, too, were to exorcize demons. When they returned to Jesus to report their success, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>). This again is metaphorical language that asserts that in the mission of Jesus’ disciples, as well as in Jesus himself, Satan has fallen from his place of power. Both “binding” and “falling” are metaphors that describe the same truth: the victory of the kingdom of God over Satan.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the element that sets Jesus apart from the OT and from all of contemporary Judaism. The prophets conceived of the kingdom being established by a heavenly supernatural being (Dn 7) or ruled by a powerful Davidic messianic king (Is 9, 11). The fulfillment of the messianic hope is everywhere in the prophets an eschatological hope. The same is true of the Jewish writers who despaired of history and cast all hope into the future.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to all that had gone before him, Jesus proclaimed the kingdom of God as an event taking place in his own person and mission. God had again assumed the initiative; God was acting. No first-century Jew had any idea of the kingdom of God coming into history in the person of an ordinary man—a teacher who was meek and lowly.<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the kingdom is further seen in the fact that the rule of God, present in Jesus, is a gift to be received. This is also true of the kingdom in its eschatological consummation, where the kingdom is freely inherited by the righteous (Mt 25:34). In answer to the young man’s question about inheriting eternal life (Mk 10:17), Jesus spoke of entering the kingdom (vv 23-24) and receiving the gift of eternal life (v 30) as though they were synonymous. The kingdom is a gift that the Father is pleased to bestow upon the little flock of Jesus’ disciples (Lk 12:32).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s eschatological rule brings to his people the blessings of that kingdom, and if God’s kingdom is his rule invading history before the eschatological consummation, then we may expect God’s rule in the present to bring a preliminary blessing to his people. This fact is reflected in numerous sayings. The kingdom is something to be sought here and now (Mt 6:33) and to be received as children receive a gift (Mk 10:15; Lk 18:16-17). Although it is present in an unexpected form, the kingdom of God in Jesus’ person is like a hidden treasure or a pearl of great price whose possession outranks all other goods (Mt 13:44-46). The gift of the kingdom is also seen in that the deaf hear, the blind see, lepers are cleansed, and the poor have good news preached to them (11:5).<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>In the Gospel of John the concept of eternal life takes the place of the kingdom of God in Jesus’ teaching. The kingdom of God is mentioned twice (Jn 3:3, 5), and it is placed in connection with eternal life. The kingdom of God is here the eschatological kingdom, and eternal life is the life of the kingdom. Thus, as the kingdom of God in the synoptic Gospels is both future and present, so eternal life is both the life of the age to come (12:25) and also a present blessing (3:16, etc.).<\/p>\n<h5>Acts<\/h5>\n<p>In Acts it seems the earliest disciples generally failed to understand Jesus’ message about the kingdom of God as a present spiritual blessing. They gathered together to await the coming of the eschatological kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6). Acts relates that the disciples continued to preach the kingdom of God, but usually it is an eschatological blessing (8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). However, the last two references make the kingdom of God synonymous with the gospel about Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>One important theme in Acts is linked to that of the kingdom of God. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter announces that God has seated Jesus at his right hand in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1 (Acts 2:33-35). In the Psalms this is a prophecy of the enthronement of the Davidic king in Jerusalem. Peter asserts that this prophecy is now fulfilled in the heavenly reign of Jesus. Therefore, he has been made both Lord and Christ (Messiah). These are interchangeable terms, “Lord” meaning absolute sovereign, “Christ” meaning the messianic king.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>Paul carried further this theme of the heavenly rule of Christ, the anointed King. The kingdom is both an eschatological inheritance (1 Cor 6:9; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; 1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 1:5; 2 Tm 4:1, 18) and a present blessing into which believers now enter (Rom 14:17; Col 1:13). The key to this is the interchangeable character of lordship and messianic kingship. Jesus is now exalted as Lord over all (Phil 2:11), and even as his lordship is invisible, it will become manifest to all at his second coming. In the same way, he has been enthroned as messianic King by virtue of his resurrection and heavenly session, and he must reign as King until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:22). The last enemy to be destroyed is death.<\/p>\n<h5>Revelation<\/h5>\n<p>The central message of the Revelation to John is the consummation of God’s redemptive purpose, when the kingdom of this world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Revelation pictures the plight of a persecuted church in a hostile world, but it assures the church that Christ has already won a victory over the powers of evil (5:5), by virtue of which he can finally destroy them (19:11–20:14). Again, the last enemy to be destroyed is death (20:13-14). Revelation closes with a highly symbolic picture of the kingdom of God (chs 21–22) when God comes to dwell among his people, and “they shall see his face” (22:4). Thus the NT ends: divine order is restored to a disordered world. This is the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Teachings of; King; Parable.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Preview • Introduction • Old Testament Background • In the New Testament Introduction According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughou...","summary_en":"KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Preview • Introduction • Old Testament Background • In the New Testament Introduction According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughou...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":5225,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Blindness","title_en":"Blindness","content_ro":"<h3>BLINDNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Condition of lacking the ability to see. Physical blindness was common in the ancient Near East and is still prevalent among the poor and tribal peoples lacking the benefits of modern medicine.<\/p>\n<p>Medical causes of blindness are not specified in the Bible, but poor personal hygiene and unsanitary living conditions were undoubtedly contributing factors. Newborn babies were especially susceptible. Much blindness from birth (Jn 9:1-3) was probably gonorrhea of the eyes. In the birth process germs from the mother passed to the eyes of the infant, where they found an ideal medium for growth. Within three days inflammation, pus and swelling would be evident. In such cases, primitive treatment could not prevent some permanent or even total damage to the eye. Modern medical practice treats all newborn babies with antiseptic eyedrops; but such treatment is not always available to the poor, or is rejected by them in parts of the Middle East today. Babies and young children have also been threatened by infectious ophthalmia. Carried by flies, that disease causes heavy crusting, droopy eyelids, loss of eyelashes, and eventually clouding of the cornea, often leading to total blindness. In parts of the world one may still see a mother (because of folk superstition) permitting flies to swarm continuously on her baby’s face even as she holds the infant in her lap. Blindness among adults might be due to side effects from illnesses such as malaria, long exposure to sandstorms and sun glare in the desert, accidents, punishment (as with Samson, Jgs 16:21), or old age (Gn 27:1; 1 Sm 4:15; 1 Kgs 14:4).<\/p>\n<p>The OT demanded special consideration for the blind (Lv 19:14) and imposed punishment for misleading a blind person (Dt 27:18). A blind man, considered defective, was not permitted to serve as a priest (Lv 21:18).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ healing ministry brought sight to the blind in fulfillment of prophecy (Lk 4:18). His ability to restore vision was one of the proofs given to John the Baptist that Jesus was the Messiah (Mt 11:5). Jesus healed two blind men in Galilee (9:27-30), one blind man in Bethsaida (Mk 8:22-26), a man blind from birth in Jerusalem (Jn 9), and a blind beggar named Bartimaeus and his friend at Jericho (Mk 10:46-52; cf. Mt 20:30-34; Lk 18:35-43). At times Jesus commanded immediate restoration (Mk 10:52). On other occasions he used “means” such as clay and water (Jn 9:6-11) or his own saliva (Mk 8:23). The apostle Paul was blinded at his conversion and received a miraculous cure in the presence of Ananias (Acts 9:1-9, 18). Paul later afflicted a sorcerer, Elymas, with temporary blindness for opposing his ministry on the island of Cyprus (13:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice; Disease.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BLINDNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Condition of lacking the ability to see. Physical blindness was common in the ancient Near East and is still prevalent among the poor and tribal peoples lacking the benefits of modern medicine.<\/p>\n<p>Medical causes of blindness are not specified in the Bible, but poor personal hygiene and unsanitary living conditions were undoubtedly contributing factors. Newborn babies were especially susceptible. Much blindness from birth (Jn 9:1-3) was probably gonorrhea of the eyes. In the birth process germs from the mother passed to the eyes of the infant, where they found an ideal medium for growth. Within three days inflammation, pus and swelling would be evident. In such cases, primitive treatment could not prevent some permanent or even total damage to the eye. Modern medical practice treats all newborn babies with antiseptic eyedrops; but such treatment is not always available to the poor, or is rejected by them in parts of the Middle East today. Babies and young children have also been threatened by infectious ophthalmia. Carried by flies, that disease causes heavy crusting, droopy eyelids, loss of eyelashes, and eventually clouding of the cornea, often leading to total blindness. In parts of the world one may still see a mother (because of folk superstition) permitting flies to swarm continuously on her baby’s face even as she holds the infant in her lap. Blindness among adults might be due to side effects from illnesses such as malaria, long exposure to sandstorms and sun glare in the desert, accidents, punishment (as with Samson, Jgs 16:21), or old age (Gn 27:1; 1 Sm 4:15; 1 Kgs 14:4).<\/p>\n<p>The OT demanded special consideration for the blind (Lv 19:14) and imposed punishment for misleading a blind person (Dt 27:18). A blind man, considered defective, was not permitted to serve as a priest (Lv 21:18).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ healing ministry brought sight to the blind in fulfillment of prophecy (Lk 4:18). His ability to restore vision was one of the proofs given to John the Baptist that Jesus was the Messiah (Mt 11:5). Jesus healed two blind men in Galilee (9:27-30), one blind man in Bethsaida (Mk 8:22-26), a man blind from birth in Jerusalem (Jn 9), and a blind beggar named Bartimaeus and his friend at Jericho (Mk 10:46-52; cf. Mt 20:30-34; Lk 18:35-43). At times Jesus commanded immediate restoration (Mk 10:52). On other occasions he used “means” such as clay and water (Jn 9:6-11) or his own saliva (Mk 8:23). The apostle Paul was blinded at his conversion and received a miraculous cure in the presence of Ananias (Acts 9:1-9, 18). Paul later afflicted a sorcerer, Elymas, with temporary blindness for opposing his ministry on the island of Cyprus (13:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice; Disease.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BLINDNESS Condition of lacking the ability to see. Physical blindness was common in the ancient Near East and is still prevalent among the poor and tribal peoples lacking the benefits of modern medicine. Medical causes of blindness are not specified in the Bible, but poor personal hygiene and unsanitary living conditions were undoubtedly contributing factors. Newborn babies were especially susceptible. Much blindness from birth (Jn 9:1-3) was probably gonorrhea of the eyes. In the birth proce...","summary_en":"BLINDNESS Condition of lacking the ability to see. Physical blindness was common in the ancient Near East and is still prevalent among the poor and tribal peoples lacking the benefits of modern medicine. Medical causes of blindness are not specified in the Bible, but poor personal hygiene and unsanitary living conditions were undoubtedly contributing factors. Newborn babies were especially susceptible. Much blindness from birth (Jn 9:1-3) was probably gonorrhea of the eyes. In the birth proce...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":6820,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Regulations concerning Cleanness and Uncleanness","title_en":"and Uncleanness, Regulations concerning, Cleanness","content_ro":"<h3>CLEANNESS AND UNCLEANNESS, Regulations Concerning<\/h3>\n<p>Aspect of Hebrew religion having physical, ceremonial, moral, and spiritual significance. Though these senses of clean and unclean can be distinguished with reference to their contexts, they also merge into and illustrate each other; the physical and ceremonial contexts point to a moral state of the worshiper and to a spiritual relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>The OT vision of a people’s relationship with God is along moral and personal lines—God’s personal nature being expressed in his giving of the law to Moses. The personal and uniquely consistent character of Israel’s Lord made him morally a completely different being from the many gods of pagan cultures. Unlike the Lord, the Baals of the Canaanites were capricious and vicious; nobody expected them to be ethically consistent. Israel’s Lord, on the other hand, could be trusted to keep his word (a verbal communication through his chosen prophets). Nobody, not even the high priest or the king, was above the law, which expressed not only God’s character but also his sovereign will for the individual and the nation. His moral consistency carried over into his miraculous interventions into history to protect his people, to judge them and their enemies, and to redeem humanity itself.<\/p>\n<p>Cleanness as defined in the book of Leviticus, therefore, was always conditioned by the presence of the personal God who gave the law. As the people sought to approach the Lord, they necessarily did so on his terms and therefore within the framework of the cultic ceremonies he had prescribed. Details of the Levitical ceremonies were designed to illustrate the moral implications of the sinner’s approach to God and God’s provision for his people to become morally clean in his sight.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the Levitical system was stated clearly in the psalmist’s words: “Who shall ascend the hill of the <span>Lord<\/span>? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully” (Ps 24:3-4, <span>rsv<\/span>). One’s state of cleanness depends not only on external actions but also on an internal relationship with God. As a result, the sinner’s inability to satisfy the moral demands of a holy God leads to his or her complete dependence on God and on God’s provision for satisfying his own demands. That provision was detailed in the law.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Early History<\/p>\n<p>• Levitical Prescriptions<\/p>\n<p>• Purification Rites<\/p>\n<p>• New Testament Perspective<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EarlyHistory\">Early History<\/p>\n<h5>Gentile Religious Background<\/h5>\n<p>The gentile conscience was no doubt a strong influence on the development of ethnic notions of clean and unclean. The subjective sense of sin’s uncleanness is universally encountered in one form or another in the literature of every great religion, whatever explanation is given for it. Many religions have rites of purification based on water and washings. The Hebrews’ ritual avoidance of certain objects, some because of their holiness and others because of their unholiness, finds an analogy in the taboos of many primitive religions, including some of those with which the early Hebrews came into contact.<\/p>\n<p>The similarities between the Hebrew and other ancient religions are easily established by superficial comparison. It would be surprising if there were none. Those differences that give biblical religion its distinctive character, however, must be accounted for.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LeviticalPrescriptions\">Levitical Prescriptions<\/p>\n<h5>Ceremonial and Moral Law<\/h5>\n<p>The relationship between the external ceremonial details of the Mosaic law and the internally directed moral requirements of such parts of it as the Ten Commandments is one of the fundamental issues of OT theology. It is possible to demonstrate that, throughout the OT, uncleanness and sin are virtually synonymous. In many passages sin is described as uncleanness (e.g., Lv 16:16, 30; the ordeal of the bitter water in Nm 5:11-28; Zec 13:1).<\/p>\n<p>The relationship between ceremonial and moral cleanness can be illustrated from passages mentioning clean hands on the one hand (2 Sm 22:21; Jb 17:9; 22:30) and a clean heart on the other (Pss 24:4; 51:10; 73:13; Prv 20:9). The prophet Isaiah felt convicted of “unclean lips” when he was in God’s presence; a purifying coal, perhaps representing forgiveness and atonement, cleansed him (Is 6:5-7). In many passages cleanness represents innocence before God (Jb 11:4; 33:9; Ps 51:7-10; Prv 20:9), and uncleanness is said to come from sin (Ps 51:2; Is 1:16; 64:6).<\/p>\n<h5>Causes of Uncleanness<\/h5>\n<p>From the Mosaic law a number of causes of uncleanness can be derived.<\/p>\n<p>1. Some foods were not to be eaten. Various laws concerning animals make a “distinction between the unclean and the clean and between the living creature that may be eaten and the living creature that may not be eaten” (Lv 11:47, <span>rsv<\/span>). Permitted food was what was acceptable to God (see also Dt 14:3-21; Acts 15:28-29).<\/p>\n<li>2. Diseases, especially leprosy, produced an unclean state (Lv 13–14). The story of Naaman refers to leprous defilement (2 Kgs 5:1-14). The Gospels refer often to lepers (e.g., Mt 8:1-4; 10:8; 11:5; Lk 4:27). Many swellings, sores, and rashes were included under that heading, including Hansen’s disease (modern leprosy). The defilement of disease included all things touched by a diseased person (Lv 14:33-57).<\/li>\n<li>3. Bodily discharges were unclean, and contact with them defiled a person for various periods of time. Emission of semen produced uncleanness until the evening, whether in intercourse (Lv 15:16-18) or inadvertently during the night (Dt 23:10). An unnatural discharge, since it usually indicated disease, made a person unclean for seven days after it had ceased (Lv 15:1-15). Menstruation also produced uncleanness lasting seven days after it ceased (Lv 15:19-24; 2 Sm 11:4). Sexual intercourse during that time made both partners unclean (Lv 15:19-24; 20:18). Contact with the spittle of an unclean person produced uncleanness for a day (15:8).<\/li>\n<li>4. Dead bodies, or even parts of them such as bone, caused uncleanness (Nm 19:16). Persons who touched a dead body were unclean for a month, and only after that period could they celebrate their own Passover if they had missed it (9:6-11). The high priest could not even bury his own parents because of his special ritual responsibilities (Lv 21:10-11; cf. Nm 6:6-7; Hg 2:13; Mt 23:27).<\/li>\n<li>5. Idolatry was the greatest source of spiritual defilement. The entire nation of Israel was defiled because of it (Ps 106:38; Is 30:22; Ez 36:25), as were the Gentiles (Jer 43:12). Consequently, contact with Gentiles was thought to produce defilement. The gospel’s universal appeal confronted that conviction (e.g., Jn 4:9; Acts 10:28; cf. Gal 2:11-14). Closely related to the defilement of idolatry was the defilement caused by unclean spirits (Zec 13:2; cf. Mt 10:1; Mk 1:23-27).<\/li>\n<h5>Laws about Objects<\/h5>\n<p>Certain laws illustrate the principle that uncleanness was transmitted much like a contagion. Dead bodies contaminated what they touched, as did dead insects and certain crawling things (Lv 11:29-38). It is interesting that dry grain, running springwater, and water in a cistern were expressly excluded from that law of contamination; perhaps otherwise, starvation would have resulted, dead insects and mice being found in grain and water every day in an agricultural community. Unclean pottery had to be broken, but wooden vessels merely required washing (Lv 15:12). Even uncovered pots in a house where a person had died became unclean (Nm 19:15); everyone who entered the house was unclean.<\/p>\n<p>Because of their idolatrous associations, the possessions of pagans were unclean; therefore, booty taken in war had to be cleansed by fire or washing (Nm 31:21-24). Clothing of wool, linen, or leather could contract unclean “leprosy” from diseased persons and had to be tested. If the leprous spots (greenish or reddish patches) spread after a test period, the garments had to be burned (Lv 13:47-59; 14:33-53).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws about Places<\/h5>\n<p>The land and people of Israel were holy; they could be defiled by the uncleanness of economic oppression or idolatry (Jos 22:17-19; Jer 13:27). Jerusalem was a holy city, but it could be defiled by the sins of its people (Ez 22:2-4; Lam 1:8) or by the blood of its slaughtered inhabitants (Lam 4:15).<\/p>\n<p>The temple could be defiled by unclean persons. It was necessary for Hezekiah to cleanse the temple after Ahaz’s idolatrous worship (2 Chr 29:15-19); Nehemiah had to cleanse the rooms in which Tobiah had been living (Neh 13:9). One of the functions of the Day of Atonement was removal of impurities transferred to the temple by the sins of the Israelites during the past year (Lv 16:16-19; 31-33).<\/p>\n<p>An unclean place received the pieces of a leprous house after its demolition (Lv 14:45). The valley of Hinnom became Jerusalem’s garbage dump in later years, giving rise to the visions of “Gehenna” as a place of eternal punishment in NT eschatology. Since the Israelite camp was a holy place, care was taken to bury human excrement outside its boundaries (Dt 23:12-14). The value of that simple expedient in preventing disease during military excursions can hardly be exaggerated, since plagues were a great scourge of ancient armies.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws about Food<\/h5>\n<p>Certain kinds of animals were unclean and thus could not be eaten (Lv 11; Dt 14:3-21). Animals that died of old age, disease, or injury, or had been wounded by predators, were unclean. Animals that did not both chew the cud and have a cloven hoof were unclean, a definition that included pigs, camels, badgers, and rabbits among others. Israelites could eat only those fish that had both fins and scales. Birds of prey and scavengers were unclean. All winged insects were unclean except hopping insects (locusts, grasshoppers, and crickets). A large classification of “crawling things” was prohibited, including worms, lizards, snakes, weasels, and mice. In addition to all those was the ancient prohibition against eating blood (Gn 9:4; Lv 17:14-15; Dt 12:16-23; Acts 15:28-29).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurificationRites\">Purification Rites<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Lapse of Time<\/h5>\n<p>Secondary contamination could often be canceled simply by waiting until the evening (Lv 11:24) or for 7, 14, 40, or 80 days. Dead bodies contaminated what they touched for 7 days (Nm 19:11), as did menstruation (Lv 15:19). When a child was born, the mother’s unclean condition lasted 7 days for a boy and 14 days for a girl. An additional 33 days for a male child and 66 days for a female were required before the mother could touch any sacred thing.<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Water<\/h5>\n<p>Contact with unclean things, such as bodily discharges, often required washing of hands and clothing, usually accompanied by the lapse of a day (Lv 15:5-11).<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Ceremonial Substances<\/h5>\n<p>Ceremonial substances used in purification rites included the ashes of a red heifer mixed with water (Nm 19:1-10), and (in cases of leprosy) cedarwood, scarlet cloth, hyssop, and blood (Lv 14:2-9). When the altar was used in a purification ceremony, only blood was suitable, since the altar was the place of sacrifice for sin (Lv 16:18-19; Ez 43:20).<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Sacrifice<\/h5>\n<p>Sacrifice was the ultimate source of both ritual and moral purification. All bodily discharges except sexual ones were purified by offerings of doves and pigeons (Lv 15:14-15, 29-30). Childbirth required a lamb and a bird (12:6). Poor people could offer birds in place of an animal (Lv 12:8; 14:21-32; Lk 2:24).<\/p>\n<p>In sacrifice, blood was symbolic of a life given and therefore a death experienced; the uncleanness of disease or sin was thought of as being transferred to the victim, thus removing the uncleanness (Lv 14:7). Sacrificial death, therefore, always had a substitutionary element. Only blood sacrifice could provide the moral cleansing necessary for sin itself; such sacrifice was therefore the basis of all cleansing, including that of disease.<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Fire<\/h5>\n<p>Some contamination could be removed only by fire, such as contamination of metal pots (Nm 31:22-23). Incest was punishable not only by death but also by burning the bodies (Lv 20:14). Idolatry had to be put away by total destruction of the objects and by burning (Ex 32:20). Cities consecrated to pagan deities were to be burned.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentPerspective\">New Testament Perspective<\/p>\n<p>The NT did not reject the OT concept of clean and unclean, but rather reinterpreted it in a new context. It stressed in particular the moral sense of the concept as well as the identification of uncleanness with sin.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels were written in the context of OT law and its Pharisaic and Sadducean accretions. Jesus obeyed the law but was often at odds with the practical casuistry (system) that had grown up around it. Jesus taught that true defilement came from the sinner’s heart and not from outside contamination (Mk 7:14-23; Lk 11:39-41). A central element in his teaching was his attack on the ceremonial externalism of the Pharisees. Thus it has been said that Jesus “internalized” the law. It would be more correct to say that he forced attention to the law’s demands on people’s inner lives.<\/p>\n<p>The intrinsic wickedness of demons is underscored by the use of the term “unclean spirit” throughout the Gospels. In fact, the word “unclean” itself always appears in the Gospels in the context of spirit, a detail that illustrates the NT shift of emphasis from ritual uncleanness to sin and its guilt.<\/p>\n<p>An important episode in the life of the early church came in Acts 10, when God taught the apostle Peter that Gentiles were not unclean in themselves and that Peter was obliged to receive them. The result was Cornelius’s conversion.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ assertion that uncleanness originates in the heart bore fruit in the apostle Paul’s doctrine of Christian freedom. Paul, a Pharisee who could say of himself that he had never broken an external law, came to see that nothing is unclean in itself (Rom 14:14-20). Throughout his epistles, cleanness is the result of obedience of the heart flowing from regeneration; it is based on the cleansing power of the Atonement (see Rom 6:19; 1 Thes 2:3-4, where uncleanness is strictly moral).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s atonement was the final cleansing agent for sin and its moral results (Heb 9:14, 22; 1 Jn 1:7), doing in reality what the blood of bulls and goats only typified. Thus those who are washed in the blood of the Lamb (Rv 7:14) are seen as wearing clean white robes (15:6; 19:8-14). His blood, symbolizing the life given and the death died by the Son at the behest of the Father, satisfies the attributes of personal justice of the triune God. Because the personal character of a righteous Father was vindicated, the personal forgiveness of sinners is morally possible. God can be in history only what he is eternally: he is both just and the justifier of believers in Christ (Rom 3:24-26).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Baptism; Circumcision; Uncircumcision; Offerings and Sacrifices; Law, Biblical Concept of; Dietary Laws.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CLEANNESS AND UNCLEANNESS, Regulations Concerning<\/h3>\n<p>Aspect of Hebrew religion having physical, ceremonial, moral, and spiritual significance. Though these senses of clean and unclean can be distinguished with reference to their contexts, they also merge into and illustrate each other; the physical and ceremonial contexts point to a moral state of the worshiper and to a spiritual relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>The OT vision of a people’s relationship with God is along moral and personal lines—God’s personal nature being expressed in his giving of the law to Moses. The personal and uniquely consistent character of Israel’s Lord made him morally a completely different being from the many gods of pagan cultures. Unlike the Lord, the Baals of the Canaanites were capricious and vicious; nobody expected them to be ethically consistent. Israel’s Lord, on the other hand, could be trusted to keep his word (a verbal communication through his chosen prophets). Nobody, not even the high priest or the king, was above the law, which expressed not only God’s character but also his sovereign will for the individual and the nation. His moral consistency carried over into his miraculous interventions into history to protect his people, to judge them and their enemies, and to redeem humanity itself.<\/p>\n<p>Cleanness as defined in the book of Leviticus, therefore, was always conditioned by the presence of the personal God who gave the law. As the people sought to approach the Lord, they necessarily did so on his terms and therefore within the framework of the cultic ceremonies he had prescribed. Details of the Levitical ceremonies were designed to illustrate the moral implications of the sinner’s approach to God and God’s provision for his people to become morally clean in his sight.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the Levitical system was stated clearly in the psalmist’s words: “Who shall ascend the hill of the <span>Lord<\/span>? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully” (Ps 24:3-4, <span>rsv<\/span>). One’s state of cleanness depends not only on external actions but also on an internal relationship with God. As a result, the sinner’s inability to satisfy the moral demands of a holy God leads to his or her complete dependence on God and on God’s provision for satisfying his own demands. That provision was detailed in the law.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Early History<\/p>\n<p>• Levitical Prescriptions<\/p>\n<p>• Purification Rites<\/p>\n<p>• New Testament Perspective<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EarlyHistory\">Early History<\/p>\n<h5>Gentile Religious Background<\/h5>\n<p>The gentile conscience was no doubt a strong influence on the development of ethnic notions of clean and unclean. The subjective sense of sin’s uncleanness is universally encountered in one form or another in the literature of every great religion, whatever explanation is given for it. Many religions have rites of purification based on water and washings. The Hebrews’ ritual avoidance of certain objects, some because of their holiness and others because of their unholiness, finds an analogy in the taboos of many primitive religions, including some of those with which the early Hebrews came into contact.<\/p>\n<p>The similarities between the Hebrew and other ancient religions are easily established by superficial comparison. It would be surprising if there were none. Those differences that give biblical religion its distinctive character, however, must be accounted for.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LeviticalPrescriptions\">Levitical Prescriptions<\/p>\n<h5>Ceremonial and Moral Law<\/h5>\n<p>The relationship between the external ceremonial details of the Mosaic law and the internally directed moral requirements of such parts of it as the Ten Commandments is one of the fundamental issues of OT theology. It is possible to demonstrate that, throughout the OT, uncleanness and sin are virtually synonymous. In many passages sin is described as uncleanness (e.g., Lv 16:16, 30; the ordeal of the bitter water in Nm 5:11-28; Zec 13:1).<\/p>\n<p>The relationship between ceremonial and moral cleanness can be illustrated from passages mentioning clean hands on the one hand (2 Sm 22:21; Jb 17:9; 22:30) and a clean heart on the other (Pss 24:4; 51:10; 73:13; Prv 20:9). The prophet Isaiah felt convicted of “unclean lips” when he was in God’s presence; a purifying coal, perhaps representing forgiveness and atonement, cleansed him (Is 6:5-7). In many passages cleanness represents innocence before God (Jb 11:4; 33:9; Ps 51:7-10; Prv 20:9), and uncleanness is said to come from sin (Ps 51:2; Is 1:16; 64:6).<\/p>\n<h5>Causes of Uncleanness<\/h5>\n<p>From the Mosaic law a number of causes of uncleanness can be derived.<\/p>\n<p>1. Some foods were not to be eaten. Various laws concerning animals make a “distinction between the unclean and the clean and between the living creature that may be eaten and the living creature that may not be eaten” (Lv 11:47, <span>rsv<\/span>). Permitted food was what was acceptable to God (see also Dt 14:3-21; Acts 15:28-29).<\/p>\n<li>2. Diseases, especially leprosy, produced an unclean state (Lv 13–14). The story of Naaman refers to leprous defilement (2 Kgs 5:1-14). The Gospels refer often to lepers (e.g., Mt 8:1-4; 10:8; 11:5; Lk 4:27). Many swellings, sores, and rashes were included under that heading, including Hansen’s disease (modern leprosy). The defilement of disease included all things touched by a diseased person (Lv 14:33-57).<\/li>\n<li>3. Bodily discharges were unclean, and contact with them defiled a person for various periods of time. Emission of semen produced uncleanness until the evening, whether in intercourse (Lv 15:16-18) or inadvertently during the night (Dt 23:10). An unnatural discharge, since it usually indicated disease, made a person unclean for seven days after it had ceased (Lv 15:1-15). Menstruation also produced uncleanness lasting seven days after it ceased (Lv 15:19-24; 2 Sm 11:4). Sexual intercourse during that time made both partners unclean (Lv 15:19-24; 20:18). Contact with the spittle of an unclean person produced uncleanness for a day (15:8).<\/li>\n<li>4. Dead bodies, or even parts of them such as bone, caused uncleanness (Nm 19:16). Persons who touched a dead body were unclean for a month, and only after that period could they celebrate their own Passover if they had missed it (9:6-11). The high priest could not even bury his own parents because of his special ritual responsibilities (Lv 21:10-11; cf. Nm 6:6-7; Hg 2:13; Mt 23:27).<\/li>\n<li>5. Idolatry was the greatest source of spiritual defilement. The entire nation of Israel was defiled because of it (Ps 106:38; Is 30:22; Ez 36:25), as were the Gentiles (Jer 43:12). Consequently, contact with Gentiles was thought to produce defilement. The gospel’s universal appeal confronted that conviction (e.g., Jn 4:9; Acts 10:28; cf. Gal 2:11-14). Closely related to the defilement of idolatry was the defilement caused by unclean spirits (Zec 13:2; cf. Mt 10:1; Mk 1:23-27).<\/li>\n<h5>Laws about Objects<\/h5>\n<p>Certain laws illustrate the principle that uncleanness was transmitted much like a contagion. Dead bodies contaminated what they touched, as did dead insects and certain crawling things (Lv 11:29-38). It is interesting that dry grain, running springwater, and water in a cistern were expressly excluded from that law of contamination; perhaps otherwise, starvation would have resulted, dead insects and mice being found in grain and water every day in an agricultural community. Unclean pottery had to be broken, but wooden vessels merely required washing (Lv 15:12). Even uncovered pots in a house where a person had died became unclean (Nm 19:15); everyone who entered the house was unclean.<\/p>\n<p>Because of their idolatrous associations, the possessions of pagans were unclean; therefore, booty taken in war had to be cleansed by fire or washing (Nm 31:21-24). Clothing of wool, linen, or leather could contract unclean “leprosy” from diseased persons and had to be tested. If the leprous spots (greenish or reddish patches) spread after a test period, the garments had to be burned (Lv 13:47-59; 14:33-53).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws about Places<\/h5>\n<p>The land and people of Israel were holy; they could be defiled by the uncleanness of economic oppression or idolatry (Jos 22:17-19; Jer 13:27). Jerusalem was a holy city, but it could be defiled by the sins of its people (Ez 22:2-4; Lam 1:8) or by the blood of its slaughtered inhabitants (Lam 4:15).<\/p>\n<p>The temple could be defiled by unclean persons. It was necessary for Hezekiah to cleanse the temple after Ahaz’s idolatrous worship (2 Chr 29:15-19); Nehemiah had to cleanse the rooms in which Tobiah had been living (Neh 13:9). One of the functions of the Day of Atonement was removal of impurities transferred to the temple by the sins of the Israelites during the past year (Lv 16:16-19; 31-33).<\/p>\n<p>An unclean place received the pieces of a leprous house after its demolition (Lv 14:45). The valley of Hinnom became Jerusalem’s garbage dump in later years, giving rise to the visions of “Gehenna” as a place of eternal punishment in NT eschatology. Since the Israelite camp was a holy place, care was taken to bury human excrement outside its boundaries (Dt 23:12-14). The value of that simple expedient in preventing disease during military excursions can hardly be exaggerated, since plagues were a great scourge of ancient armies.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws about Food<\/h5>\n<p>Certain kinds of animals were unclean and thus could not be eaten (Lv 11; Dt 14:3-21). Animals that died of old age, disease, or injury, or had been wounded by predators, were unclean. Animals that did not both chew the cud and have a cloven hoof were unclean, a definition that included pigs, camels, badgers, and rabbits among others. Israelites could eat only those fish that had both fins and scales. Birds of prey and scavengers were unclean. All winged insects were unclean except hopping insects (locusts, grasshoppers, and crickets). A large classification of “crawling things” was prohibited, including worms, lizards, snakes, weasels, and mice. In addition to all those was the ancient prohibition against eating blood (Gn 9:4; Lv 17:14-15; Dt 12:16-23; Acts 15:28-29).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurificationRites\">Purification Rites<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Lapse of Time<\/h5>\n<p>Secondary contamination could often be canceled simply by waiting until the evening (Lv 11:24) or for 7, 14, 40, or 80 days. Dead bodies contaminated what they touched for 7 days (Nm 19:11), as did menstruation (Lv 15:19). When a child was born, the mother’s unclean condition lasted 7 days for a boy and 14 days for a girl. An additional 33 days for a male child and 66 days for a female were required before the mother could touch any sacred thing.<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Water<\/h5>\n<p>Contact with unclean things, such as bodily discharges, often required washing of hands and clothing, usually accompanied by the lapse of a day (Lv 15:5-11).<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Ceremonial Substances<\/h5>\n<p>Ceremonial substances used in purification rites included the ashes of a red heifer mixed with water (Nm 19:1-10), and (in cases of leprosy) cedarwood, scarlet cloth, hyssop, and blood (Lv 14:2-9). When the altar was used in a purification ceremony, only blood was suitable, since the altar was the place of sacrifice for sin (Lv 16:18-19; Ez 43:20).<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Sacrifice<\/h5>\n<p>Sacrifice was the ultimate source of both ritual and moral purification. All bodily discharges except sexual ones were purified by offerings of doves and pigeons (Lv 15:14-15, 29-30). Childbirth required a lamb and a bird (12:6). Poor people could offer birds in place of an animal (Lv 12:8; 14:21-32; Lk 2:24).<\/p>\n<p>In sacrifice, blood was symbolic of a life given and therefore a death experienced; the uncleanness of disease or sin was thought of as being transferred to the victim, thus removing the uncleanness (Lv 14:7). Sacrificial death, therefore, always had a substitutionary element. Only blood sacrifice could provide the moral cleansing necessary for sin itself; such sacrifice was therefore the basis of all cleansing, including that of disease.<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Fire<\/h5>\n<p>Some contamination could be removed only by fire, such as contamination of metal pots (Nm 31:22-23). Incest was punishable not only by death but also by burning the bodies (Lv 20:14). Idolatry had to be put away by total destruction of the objects and by burning (Ex 32:20). Cities consecrated to pagan deities were to be burned.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentPerspective\">New Testament Perspective<\/p>\n<p>The NT did not reject the OT concept of clean and unclean, but rather reinterpreted it in a new context. It stressed in particular the moral sense of the concept as well as the identification of uncleanness with sin.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels were written in the context of OT law and its Pharisaic and Sadducean accretions. Jesus obeyed the law but was often at odds with the practical casuistry (system) that had grown up around it. Jesus taught that true defilement came from the sinner’s heart and not from outside contamination (Mk 7:14-23; Lk 11:39-41). A central element in his teaching was his attack on the ceremonial externalism of the Pharisees. Thus it has been said that Jesus “internalized” the law. It would be more correct to say that he forced attention to the law’s demands on people’s inner lives.<\/p>\n<p>The intrinsic wickedness of demons is underscored by the use of the term “unclean spirit” throughout the Gospels. In fact, the word “unclean” itself always appears in the Gospels in the context of spirit, a detail that illustrates the NT shift of emphasis from ritual uncleanness to sin and its guilt.<\/p>\n<p>An important episode in the life of the early church came in Acts 10, when God taught the apostle Peter that Gentiles were not unclean in themselves and that Peter was obliged to receive them. The result was Cornelius’s conversion.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ assertion that uncleanness originates in the heart bore fruit in the apostle Paul’s doctrine of Christian freedom. Paul, a Pharisee who could say of himself that he had never broken an external law, came to see that nothing is unclean in itself (Rom 14:14-20). Throughout his epistles, cleanness is the result of obedience of the heart flowing from regeneration; it is based on the cleansing power of the Atonement (see Rom 6:19; 1 Thes 2:3-4, where uncleanness is strictly moral).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s atonement was the final cleansing agent for sin and its moral results (Heb 9:14, 22; 1 Jn 1:7), doing in reality what the blood of bulls and goats only typified. Thus those who are washed in the blood of the Lamb (Rv 7:14) are seen as wearing clean white robes (15:6; 19:8-14). His blood, symbolizing the life given and the death died by the Son at the behest of the Father, satisfies the attributes of personal justice of the triune God. Because the personal character of a righteous Father was vindicated, the personal forgiveness of sinners is morally possible. God can be in history only what he is eternally: he is both just and the justifier of believers in Christ (Rom 3:24-26).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Baptism; Circumcision; Uncircumcision; Offerings and Sacrifices; Law, Biblical Concept of; Dietary Laws.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CLEANNESS AND UNCLEANNESS, Regulations Concerning Aspect of Hebrew religion having physical, ceremonial, moral, and spiritual significance. Though these senses of clean and unclean can be distinguished with reference to their contexts, they also merge into and illustrate each other; the physical and ceremonial contexts point to a moral state of the worshiper and to a spiritual relationship between God and his people. The OT vision of a people’s relationship with God is along moral and persona...","summary_en":"CLEANNESS AND UNCLEANNESS, Regulations Concerning Aspect of Hebrew religion having physical, ceremonial, moral, and spiritual significance. Though these senses of clean and unclean can be distinguished with reference to their contexts, they also merge into and illustrate each other; the physical and ceremonial contexts point to a moral state of the worshiper and to a spiritual relationship between God and his people. The OT vision of a people’s relationship with God is along moral and persona...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9031,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Deafness Deaf","title_en":"Deafness Deaf","content_ro":"<h3>DEAF, DEAFNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Inability to hear; term used in Scripture to describe both a literal, physical inability and a figurative, spiritual defect. The spiritually deaf were those who either refused to hear the divine message or were rendered incapable because of their lack of spirituality (Ps 38:13). The prophet Isaiah forcefully addressed both types of deaf persons (the figurative in Is 42:18; 43:8; the literal in Is 29:18; 35:5). In the OT, although the condition was considered the result of God’s judgment (Ex 4:11; Mi 7:16), it was wrong to curse a deaf person (Lv 19:14). In the NT the deaf were among those Jesus healed (Mt 11:5; Mk 7:32-37; Lk 7:22). An epileptic boy whom Jesus healed was afflicted with a “dumb and deaf spirit” (Mk 9:25, <span>rsv<\/span>). Such healings authenticated Jesus’ role as Messiah.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DEAF, DEAFNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Inability to hear; term used in Scripture to describe both a literal, physical inability and a figurative, spiritual defect. The spiritually deaf were those who either refused to hear the divine message or were rendered incapable because of their lack of spirituality (Ps 38:13). The prophet Isaiah forcefully addressed both types of deaf persons (the figurative in Is 42:18; 43:8; the literal in Is 29:18; 35:5). In the OT, although the condition was considered the result of God’s judgment (Ex 4:11; Mi 7:16), it was wrong to curse a deaf person (Lv 19:14). In the NT the deaf were among those Jesus healed (Mt 11:5; Mk 7:32-37; Lk 7:22). An epileptic boy whom Jesus healed was afflicted with a “dumb and deaf spirit” (Mk 9:25, <span>rsv<\/span>). Such healings authenticated Jesus’ role as Messiah.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DEAF, DEAFNESS Inability to hear; term used in Scripture to describe both a literal, physical inability and a figurative, spiritual defect. The spiritually deaf were those who either refused to hear the divine message or were rendered incapable because of their lack of spirituality (Ps 38:13). The prophet Isaiah forcefully addressed both types of deaf persons (the figurative in Is 42:18; 43:8; the literal in Is 29:18; 35:5). In the OT, although the condition was considered the result of God’s...","summary_en":"DEAF, DEAFNESS Inability to hear; term used in Scripture to describe both a literal, physical inability and a figurative, spiritual defect. The spiritually deaf were those who either refused to hear the divine message or were rendered incapable because of their lack of spirituality (Ps 38:13). The prophet Isaiah forcefully addressed both types of deaf persons (the figurative in Is 42:18; 43:8; the literal in Is 29:18; 35:5). In the OT, although the condition was considered the result of God’s...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14539,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel","title_en":"Gospel","content_ro":"<h3>GOSPEL<\/h3>\n<p>Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon <em>godspell<\/em> denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelMessageofIsaiah\">The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his saving action except in his own nature. Israel’s deliverance is undeserved; she is no more worthy of the divine love now than when she went into captivity. In whatever measure she has paid the just due for her past sins (Is 40:2), she remains a sinful people (42:25; 46:12-13; 48:1). It is only by God’s grace that she is saved (55:1-7). By God’s design, Israel’s salvation depends not upon her own righteousness but upon his (41:10; 45:24; 46:13; 51:5-6). There being no righteousness to reward, the Lord acts to <em>create<\/em> righteousness in Israel (45:8; 61:3, 10-11). Yet as these references indicate, salvation is not accomplished at the expense of justice. The penalty for Israel’s sins is to be paid in full. God’s mercy is not hereby called into question. On the contrary, it is precisely here that his mercy is most poignantly expressed, for the penalty is exacted not from his people but from the Servant appointed to stand in their place (53:4-12). Through the Servant’s work, many shall be justified (53:11). The coming of the Evangelist—the preacher of the good news—is predicted in Isaiah 61. He is called the anointed One (v 1) who proclaims the year of the Lord’s favor (v 2). God will be glorified through his preaching (v 3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelintheNewTestament\">The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In only two places (Gal 3:8; Heb 4:2, 6) does the NT speak of the proclamation of the gospel prior to the Christian era. This is quite remarkable, given (1) the unmistakable presence of the gospel in the OT, (2) the extent of gospel terminology in the NT (in the Greek the noun appears 76 times; and the verb, 54), and (3) the fact that the NT presents Christ as the fulfillment of the OT and draws heavily on the OT to interpret his person and work. Not only is it remarkable; it is very significant. It indicates that the NT usage depends not only upon the <em>character<\/em> of the message (truth about salvation) but also upon <em>historical events.<\/em> Almost without exception, the NT restricts its application of gospel terminology to proclamations made during the time of fulfillment—the age in which the salvation promised in the OT is actually accomplished. The NT is preoccupied, not with promises of salvation, but with news of salvation. According to Mark 1:1-4, the gospel “begins” not in the OT but with John the Baptist, in whose work OT prophecy is fulfilled. In Romans 1:1-5 the gospel is represented as a blessing promised in the OT but not actually given until Jesus comes (see also Acts 13:32-33).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGoodNewsofChristsComing\">The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>The promised birth of John the Baptist is good news (Lk 1:19), not only for his parents (vv 7, 24-25) but for all the people: John is sent to prepare them for Messiah’s coming (vv 14-17, 67-79). John’s own preaching is gospel (3:18) for the same reason. The Messiah would be coming to execute judgment, a process that involves both condemnation and salvation (vv 3-17). John’s message is gospel for sinners in that they are warned of impending doom and urged to repent before the ax falls (vv 7-9); it is gospel for the repentant in that they are promised forgiveness (v 3) and membership in Messiah’s community (v 17). The birth of the Savior himself is announced as good news bringing great joy (2:10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelaccordingtoJesus\">The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Kingdom of God<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was authorized by God and anointed by the Spirit to proclaim the gospel (Mk 1:14; Lk 4:18). At the heart of his preaching stands the announcement “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel” (Mk 1:15). (For further references to this gospel, see Mt 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; 26:13; Mk 8:35; 10:29; 13:10; 14:9; Lk 4:43; 8:1; 16:16.) The message is good news for several reasons: (1) The kingdom is coming. The God whom Jesus proclaims is sovereign over all he has made. Yet paradoxically his rule is incomplete: his will is not done on earth as it is in heaven; wrong, not right, prevails. But these conditions are not final, according to Jesus. With the coming of the kingdom, God’s rule will be completed; wrong will be judged, righteousness established, and his people blessed. (2) The kingdom is <em>now<\/em> being inaugurated. “The time is fulfilled,” declares Jesus (Mk 1:15a). The time appointed for the fulfillment of the OT promises has arrived. (3) The consummation of the kingdom is therefore no longer a distant prospect; the full realization of God’s rule is “at hand” (Mk 1:15b). (4) God is establishing his rule for a saving purpose. This is implied in Jesus’ call to repentance (Mk 1:15c). It is especially clear in the passages to which we now turn.<\/p>\n<h5>The Salvation of the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Invited to read the Scripture in the synagogue at Nazareth, Jesus turns to Isaiah 61: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord” (Lk 4:18-19, <span>rsv<\/span>). Having read the prophecy, Jesus announces its fulfillment in his own ministry (v 21). Included among those whom Jesus has come to free are the physically infirm, such as the blind (v 18) and the leprous (v 27) (cf. the references to healing miracles in vv 23, 33-41; the close connection between evangelizing and healing in Mt 4:23; 9:35; 11:5; Lk 7:21-22; 9:6; and the description in Mt 12:22-29; Lk 13:11-16, of the physically afflicted as captives of Satan now liberated by Jesus). Also included are the materially poor—people like the widow helped by Elijah during the famine (Lk 4:25-26). It is the literally poor and hungry whom Jesus pronounces “blessed” in Luke 6:20-21. Yet it is primarily “spiritual” poverty that is in view. Still applying Isaiah 61, Jesus speaks in Matthew 5:3 of the “poor in spirit.” These are people broken and grieved by misery and poverty, oppression and injustice, suffering and death, national apostasy and personal sin—people who in their extremity turn to God and longingly wait for him to bring forth justice, bestow his mercy, and establish his kingdom. It is to just such people that Jesus brings good news (Mt 5:3-10). God sent him to usher in the kingdom, to rescue the lost, to liberate the enslaved, to cure the afflicted, to bind up hearts that are broken, and to forgive the guilty (Mk 2:5, 10, 17; 10:45; Lk 4:18-21; 7:48-49; 15:1-32; 19:10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gift of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>The coming of the kingdom is not the effect or the reward of human effort but God’s answer to the human predicament—the gift of his favor (Lk 12:32). Correspondingly, the explanation for the salvation of the poor lies nowhere but in God’s own character. As the prodigal himself recognized, he hardly deserved to be his father’s servant, much less his son. Nothing he did, not even his repentance, accounted for the father’s love (15:11-32). In the parable of Matthew 20:1-16, it is owing entirely to the goodness of the employer that the last workers to be hired receive a full day’s wages. The first debtor in the story of Matthew 18:23-35 earned nothing but the right to be sold into slavery; instead, the king canceled his enormous debt. The publican, who had nothing to offer God but a confession of sin and plea for mercy, went home justified (Lk 18:13-14). The same holds true for the more virtuous among the poor, such as the persons described in Matthew 5:7-10. Their virtue is real, not imagined. Yet in keeping God’s commands, they do not put him in their debt; they are simply doing their duty (Lk 17:7-10). Furthermore, even the most merciful need divine mercy (Mt 5:7). For even those most zealous to obey God’s law are unable to fulfill all its requirements (cf. 11:28-30). The first servant in Matthew 18:23-35 owes far more money than someone in such a situation could possibly pay—which serves to magnify the generosity of the king. Grace depends for its exercise upon the inability of its objects (Lk 14:12-14).<\/p>\n<h5>The Call to Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The Israelites are without exception a sinful people, all of them needing the salvation that Jesus brings (Mt 1:21; Lk 1:77). In demonstration of God’s grace, Jesus proclaimed his gospel to the entire nation (Mt 4:23; 9:35; 15:24; Lk 4:43; 9:6; 20:1). From the most respectable to the least, all are summoned to submit to God’s rule, all are invited to come and partake freely of the banquet he has spread (Lk 14:16-24). But the gift of salvation must be received if it is to be experienced (Mk 10:15). And while it is indeed a gift that costs nothing, it is also a priceless treasure for which a wise person will freely sacrifice everything else (Mt 13:44-46), a sacrifice exceeded only by the cost of rejecting the gospel (Mt 11:20-24; Mk 8:34-39; Lk 14:24, 33). “Repent and believe in the gospel,” Jesus commands (Mk 1:15). The self-righteous and the self-sufficient must be jolted out of their false sense of security and humbly recognize their need for God (Lk 6:24-26). Only then will Jesus’ message to the poor be seen as gospel. An announcement of liberation (4:18-19) is good news only to people who are enslaved and know they are. The command applies also to the destitute and the afflicted. Those among them who bemoan their lot must repent of their sins. But something further is needed for the response to be complete: a person cannot believe Jesus’ gospel without a commitment to the <em>Person<\/em> of Christ (Jn 3:16). Even those who are already “poor in spirit,” in the sense defined earlier, are not really “blessed” until they acknowledge the truth of Jesus’ claims (Mt 11:6) and commit themselves to a life of obedience on his terms (7:21-27). This prepares us for the next point.<\/p>\n<h5>Summary<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout Jesus’ earthly ministry, the theme of his gospel remains the dawning of God’s kingdom (Mt 4:23; 24:14; Lk 4:43; 16:16), a message that is preached almost exclusively to Jews (Mt 10:5-6; 15:24). Yet Jesus also provides glimpses into what the gospel was to become once his work on earth was accomplished: (1) In Mark 8:35 and 10:29 Jesus speaks of individuals who needed to make great sacrifices “for my sake and for the gospel.” While distinguished from each other, the person of Jesus and the gospel are here associated in the closest possible way. The time was approaching when the Proclaimer of the gospel would become the Proclaimed. (2) In Mark 13:10 and Matthew 24:14 (and the textually doubtful Mk 16:15) Jesus foretells the preaching of the gospel of the kingdom to the gentile nations. (3) In Mark 14, having interpreted a woman’s action (v 3) as an anointing of his body beforehand for burial (v 8), Jesus declares, “And truly, I say to you, wherever the gospel is preached in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her” (v 9, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 26:13). This statement strongly implies that both the person of Jesus and the event of his death will figure prominently in the message that is to be proclaimed; otherwise, it is strange that the gospel and this particular act should be so solemnly bound together. Thus, here in the text already is an indication of how crucial Jesus’ death is both for the provision of the salvation announced in his gospel (cf. Mk 14:22-24) and for the launching of the evangelistic mission to the Gentiles (Mt 20:28 is vital for explaining the shift from Mt 15:24 to 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelafterJesusResurrection\">The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p>After the resurrection of Jesus, the gospel was proclaimed by his eyewitnesses. The contents of this gospel are recorded in the book of Acts and in Paul’s letters. Of the 43 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelizomai<\/span> (“evangelize”) beyond the Gospels, 15 occur in Acts and 21 in Paul’s writings; of the 64 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelion<\/span> (“gospel”), 2 occur in Acts and no fewer than 60 in Paul.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Having risen from the dead, Jesus Christ again evangelizes (Eph 2:16-17), doing so now through his appointed representatives (Rom 15:16-18; 1 Cor 1:17; 9:12-18; Gal 4:13-14; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:9-11). More than that, Christ has become the central theme of the gospel; the Proclaimer is now the Proclaimed. This is repeatedly affirmed in Acts (5:42; 8:4-5, 35; 11:20; 17:18) and in Paul’s writings (Rom 1:1-4; 10:8-17; 15:19-20; 2 Cor 4:4-6; 11:4; Gal 1:16; Eph 3:8; Phil 1:15-18; 2 Tm 2:8). The NT always speaks of <em>the gospel<\/em>—never the gospels—of Christ. A second gospel is as inconceivable and as unnecessary as a second Christ. This is the one gospel that God authorizes (e.g., Rom 1:1-17) and proclaims (e.g., 2 Thes 2:13-14). Galatians 2:7-9 speaks not of two gospels but of two mission fields. Paul (the apostle to the uncircumcised) and Peter (the apostle to the circumcised) are both entrusted with “the gospel of Christ” (Gal 1:7; cf. 1 Cor 15:1-11), the message that God has ordained for the salvation of Jews and Gentiles alike (Rom 1:16). The “different gospel” that Paul denounces in Galatians 1:6-9 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is not another gospel about Jesus but a message about “another Jesus”—not the real one, but one who exists only in the minds and the messages of those who proclaim him. To preach the true Christ is to preach the true gospel, however questionable one’s motives (Phil 1:15-18, 27), and to respond rightly to the gospel is to turn to Christ (Acts 11:20-21; Rom 10:8-17; Gal 2:14-16).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Witness to Saving Events<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel bears witness to every aspect of Christ’s saving work, from his birth (Rom 1:3; 2 Tm 2:8) and public ministry (Mk 1:1; Acts 10:36-38) to his second coming (Col 1:5, 23; cf. 3:1-4; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and the last judgment (Rom 2:16). But it is the death and the resurrection of Christ that are most crucial for the accomplishment of salvation, and that are therefore most prominent in the gospel’s witness. These are the events with which Mark’s proclamation climaxes (chs 15–16), and for which everything else prepares (8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34; 12:6-8); special stress is placed upon Jesus’ death as the means of salvation from sin (10:45; 14:3-9, 22-24). In Paul’s gospel, too, the death and resurrection of Jesus are central (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:1-4), with the cross occupying the very center (1 Cor 1:17–2:5). Had Christ not risen from the dead, Paul argues, the preaching of the cross would be a waste of time (1 Cor 15:14, 17; cf. Rom 6:3-11). However, now that Christ has risen, his death deserves special emphasis as the place where God provides atonement for sins (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 2 Cor 5:14-21; Eph 1:7). The gospel according to Acts proclaims Jesus’ death (Acts 8:25; 20:24, 28; cf. 10:36-43) and preeminently his resurrection, the event by which he conquered death and was exalted as Lord and coming Judge (10:36-43; 13:32-33; 17:18, 31). According to 1 Peter, the bearers of the gospel (1 Pt 1:12) concentrated, as had the OT prophets, on “the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glory” (1:11; cf. 1:18-19; 2:21-24; 3:18-22).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Power for Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel is much more than a report of past events and an exposition of doctrine. Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 1:17-18 and again in Romans 1:16 that the gospel is “the power of God”—not merely a witness to his power but an <em>expression<\/em> of his power. Thus, it cannot be fettered (2 Tm 2:8-9). “Our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power,” Paul writes in 1 Thessalonians 1:5. His point is not that the gospel was accompanied by mighty works (though this happened; cf. Rom 15:18-19), but that the gospel itself is a mighty work. God makes it so through his Holy Spirit (Rom 15:18-19; 1 Cor 2:1-5; 1 Thes 1:6). Furthermore, God’s singular purpose in exercising his power is to change people’s lives, to liberate them from sin and death, and to reconcile them to himself—in short, to save them. The gospel has power to effect the salvation it announces and to impart the life it promises (e.g., Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-18; 15:1-2; Eph 1:13; 2 Thes 2:13-14; 2 Tm 1:8-11; 1 Pt 1:23-25). If people are to experience salvation, they must hear and believe the gospel. It is precisely in and through this message that the saving power manifested in the person and work of Christ (especially in his death and resurrection) is conveyed to men and made effective in their lives. Similarly it is in association with the gospel, or as a direct result of the reception of the gospel, that the Holy Spirit is imparted to believers (Acts 10:36-44; 15:7-8; 2 Cor 11:4; Gal 3:1-2). In short, the gospel is the decisive place of encounter between the sinner and God the Savior.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>According to Peter’s testimony at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:7-11), an essential part of the gospel—for Gentiles and Jews alike—is salvation “through the grace of the Lord Jesus.” Toward the close of his missionary career, Paul states that his basic concern has been “to testify to the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24, <span>rsv<\/span>). This statement can be understood only in relation to Paul’s concept of the righteousness of God, particularly as set forth in Romans. Paul is here not merely expounding a divine attribute. Rather, he is dramatizing a divine activity—the manifestation of God’s righteousness now, “in the present time” (Rom 3:26), in the new age inaugurated by the coming of Jesus. The manifestation is twofold. Viewing the two aspects together, and doing so in the light of the gospel declared by Isaiah and by Jesus (both of whom strongly influenced Paul), respectively, will help us to understand why Paul speaks of “the gospel of the grace of God.”<\/p>\n<p>First, the gospel is a <em>witness<\/em> to God’s grace. In offering his Son as a sacrifice for sins (Rom 3:25a), God demonstrates his righteousness (vv 25b-26). That is, in the death of Jesus sins formerly “passed over” (v 25c) become the object of God’s wrath (cf. 1:18) and judgment. Yet in the very place where God deals justly and decisively with sins, he shows his grace to sinners. For the judgment against sin is focused not upon the sinners themselves but upon the One appointed to act on their behalf and to stand in their place (Rom 4:25; 5:6, 11; cf. 2 Cor 5:21; Gal 3:13). On this basis, sinners are freely pardoned (Rom 3:24). “The grace of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 15:11) toward the sinful is also in evidence, for he willingly bears their iniquities and suffers the consequences of their wrongdoing (Gal 2:20; cf. 2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the gospel is a <em>channel<\/em> of God’s grace. “The righteousness of God is revealed” in the gospel, says Paul (Rom 1:17). By this he means, not that the gospel talks about the righteousness of God (though it does), but that God’s righteousness is actively at work in the gospel. This activity in turn explains how the gospel becomes “the power of God for salvation” (v 16). And just how does God demonstrate his righteousness at this stage? In short, by bestowing it as a free gift on sinful human beings. It remains the righteousness of God, but by God’s grace, it is a righteousness in which humans may share. Furthermore, partaking of God’s righteousness depends on being personally united with Jesus Christ. In Paul’s view the saved person is one who has been acquitted, justified, “declared righteous” by God the judge. The basis for the verdict is not that I in myself am righteous (God justifies the ungodly, Rom 4:5). Nor does God treat me as though I were righteous. According to Paul I am declared righteous because I really <em>am<\/em> righteous—not in myself but in Christ (1 Cor 1:30; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9). This union is established through the revelation—and the free offer—of God’s righteousness in the gospel (Rom 1:16-17).<\/p>\n<h5>Responding to the Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel calls for a threefold response:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>Believing.<\/em> The gospel, says Paul, is “the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith” (Rom 1:16). For Paul, faith is the abandonment of all reliance upon “works of law” for justification (3:28) and utter dependence upon the grace of God as demonstrated in the work of Christ, especially his death (v 25). Accordingly, the “different gospel” of Galatians 1:6 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is spurious, for it preaches salvation by personal merit rather than (or together with) the work of Christ (cf. Gal 2:16). Ultimately faith rests upon God (Rom 4:24; 1 Thes 1:8-9) and upon Christ (Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 2:16, 20). Yet it is imperative that one believe the gospel also (Acts 8:12; 11:20-21; 15:7; Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-24; Phil 1:27; Heb 4:2), for it is just by this means that God’s salvation is made known and mediated. Moreover, believing the gospel entails repentance (Acts 14:15; 20:21, 24; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and obedience (Rom 1:5; 15:16-18; Heb 4:6). Those who refuse to obey the gospel are imperiling their lives (2 Thes 1:5-10; 1 Pt 4:17).<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Growing.<\/em> The Gospel is more than a message to be received—it is also a place in which to stand (1 Cor 15:1-2). It is sustainer of life as well as giver of life. One grows as a Christian not by turning from the gospel to other things (to turn away from the gospel is to abandon God and Christ, Gal 1:6), but by going ever more deeply into the gospel. In Romans 1:15 Paul expresses his eagerness to proclaim the gospel to the Christians in Rome. In the following chapters, anticipating his visit, he offers one of his most profound expositions of the gospel—one whose truth has never been fathomed and whose power has never been exhausted.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Hoping.<\/em> “The hope of the gospel” (Col 1:23) includes not only the return of Christ and the glory of heaven (Col 1:5; 3:1-4; 2 Thes 2:14-16) but the final judgment as well. For those who embrace the gospel, the last judgment holds no terrors, because the Judge is the very one who rescues them from the wrath to come (1 Thes 1:10). Those who are united to him need not dread condemnation now or at the end (Rom 8:1). Instead, the last judgment will mark their final vindication (1 Cor 4:5; Gal 5:5). Accordingly, this theme is not just a corollary but an integral part of the Good News (Rom 2:16). Those who have died since believing the gospel (1 Pt 4:6) may seem to have suffered a fate common to all people, or even the condemnation reserved for the lawless; in fact, their response to the gospel assures them of approval by the coming Lord (4:5-6; 5:4) and of a share in the imperishable inheritance of heaven (1:4).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GOSPEL<\/h3>\n<p>Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon <em>godspell<\/em> denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelMessageofIsaiah\">The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his saving action except in his own nature. Israel’s deliverance is undeserved; she is no more worthy of the divine love now than when she went into captivity. In whatever measure she has paid the just due for her past sins (Is 40:2), she remains a sinful people (42:25; 46:12-13; 48:1). It is only by God’s grace that she is saved (55:1-7). By God’s design, Israel’s salvation depends not upon her own righteousness but upon his (41:10; 45:24; 46:13; 51:5-6). There being no righteousness to reward, the Lord acts to <em>create<\/em> righteousness in Israel (45:8; 61:3, 10-11). Yet as these references indicate, salvation is not accomplished at the expense of justice. The penalty for Israel’s sins is to be paid in full. God’s mercy is not hereby called into question. On the contrary, it is precisely here that his mercy is most poignantly expressed, for the penalty is exacted not from his people but from the Servant appointed to stand in their place (53:4-12). Through the Servant’s work, many shall be justified (53:11). The coming of the Evangelist—the preacher of the good news—is predicted in Isaiah 61. He is called the anointed One (v 1) who proclaims the year of the Lord’s favor (v 2). God will be glorified through his preaching (v 3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelintheNewTestament\">The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In only two places (Gal 3:8; Heb 4:2, 6) does the NT speak of the proclamation of the gospel prior to the Christian era. This is quite remarkable, given (1) the unmistakable presence of the gospel in the OT, (2) the extent of gospel terminology in the NT (in the Greek the noun appears 76 times; and the verb, 54), and (3) the fact that the NT presents Christ as the fulfillment of the OT and draws heavily on the OT to interpret his person and work. Not only is it remarkable; it is very significant. It indicates that the NT usage depends not only upon the <em>character<\/em> of the message (truth about salvation) but also upon <em>historical events.<\/em> Almost without exception, the NT restricts its application of gospel terminology to proclamations made during the time of fulfillment—the age in which the salvation promised in the OT is actually accomplished. The NT is preoccupied, not with promises of salvation, but with news of salvation. According to Mark 1:1-4, the gospel “begins” not in the OT but with John the Baptist, in whose work OT prophecy is fulfilled. In Romans 1:1-5 the gospel is represented as a blessing promised in the OT but not actually given until Jesus comes (see also Acts 13:32-33).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGoodNewsofChristsComing\">The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>The promised birth of John the Baptist is good news (Lk 1:19), not only for his parents (vv 7, 24-25) but for all the people: John is sent to prepare them for Messiah’s coming (vv 14-17, 67-79). John’s own preaching is gospel (3:18) for the same reason. The Messiah would be coming to execute judgment, a process that involves both condemnation and salvation (vv 3-17). John’s message is gospel for sinners in that they are warned of impending doom and urged to repent before the ax falls (vv 7-9); it is gospel for the repentant in that they are promised forgiveness (v 3) and membership in Messiah’s community (v 17). The birth of the Savior himself is announced as good news bringing great joy (2:10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelaccordingtoJesus\">The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Kingdom of God<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was authorized by God and anointed by the Spirit to proclaim the gospel (Mk 1:14; Lk 4:18). At the heart of his preaching stands the announcement “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel” (Mk 1:15). (For further references to this gospel, see Mt 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; 26:13; Mk 8:35; 10:29; 13:10; 14:9; Lk 4:43; 8:1; 16:16.) The message is good news for several reasons: (1) The kingdom is coming. The God whom Jesus proclaims is sovereign over all he has made. Yet paradoxically his rule is incomplete: his will is not done on earth as it is in heaven; wrong, not right, prevails. But these conditions are not final, according to Jesus. With the coming of the kingdom, God’s rule will be completed; wrong will be judged, righteousness established, and his people blessed. (2) The kingdom is <em>now<\/em> being inaugurated. “The time is fulfilled,” declares Jesus (Mk 1:15a). The time appointed for the fulfillment of the OT promises has arrived. (3) The consummation of the kingdom is therefore no longer a distant prospect; the full realization of God’s rule is “at hand” (Mk 1:15b). (4) God is establishing his rule for a saving purpose. This is implied in Jesus’ call to repentance (Mk 1:15c). It is especially clear in the passages to which we now turn.<\/p>\n<h5>The Salvation of the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Invited to read the Scripture in the synagogue at Nazareth, Jesus turns to Isaiah 61: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord” (Lk 4:18-19, <span>rsv<\/span>). Having read the prophecy, Jesus announces its fulfillment in his own ministry (v 21). Included among those whom Jesus has come to free are the physically infirm, such as the blind (v 18) and the leprous (v 27) (cf. the references to healing miracles in vv 23, 33-41; the close connection between evangelizing and healing in Mt 4:23; 9:35; 11:5; Lk 7:21-22; 9:6; and the description in Mt 12:22-29; Lk 13:11-16, of the physically afflicted as captives of Satan now liberated by Jesus). Also included are the materially poor—people like the widow helped by Elijah during the famine (Lk 4:25-26). It is the literally poor and hungry whom Jesus pronounces “blessed” in Luke 6:20-21. Yet it is primarily “spiritual” poverty that is in view. Still applying Isaiah 61, Jesus speaks in Matthew 5:3 of the “poor in spirit.” These are people broken and grieved by misery and poverty, oppression and injustice, suffering and death, national apostasy and personal sin—people who in their extremity turn to God and longingly wait for him to bring forth justice, bestow his mercy, and establish his kingdom. It is to just such people that Jesus brings good news (Mt 5:3-10). God sent him to usher in the kingdom, to rescue the lost, to liberate the enslaved, to cure the afflicted, to bind up hearts that are broken, and to forgive the guilty (Mk 2:5, 10, 17; 10:45; Lk 4:18-21; 7:48-49; 15:1-32; 19:10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gift of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>The coming of the kingdom is not the effect or the reward of human effort but God’s answer to the human predicament—the gift of his favor (Lk 12:32). Correspondingly, the explanation for the salvation of the poor lies nowhere but in God’s own character. As the prodigal himself recognized, he hardly deserved to be his father’s servant, much less his son. Nothing he did, not even his repentance, accounted for the father’s love (15:11-32). In the parable of Matthew 20:1-16, it is owing entirely to the goodness of the employer that the last workers to be hired receive a full day’s wages. The first debtor in the story of Matthew 18:23-35 earned nothing but the right to be sold into slavery; instead, the king canceled his enormous debt. The publican, who had nothing to offer God but a confession of sin and plea for mercy, went home justified (Lk 18:13-14). The same holds true for the more virtuous among the poor, such as the persons described in Matthew 5:7-10. Their virtue is real, not imagined. Yet in keeping God’s commands, they do not put him in their debt; they are simply doing their duty (Lk 17:7-10). Furthermore, even the most merciful need divine mercy (Mt 5:7). For even those most zealous to obey God’s law are unable to fulfill all its requirements (cf. 11:28-30). The first servant in Matthew 18:23-35 owes far more money than someone in such a situation could possibly pay—which serves to magnify the generosity of the king. Grace depends for its exercise upon the inability of its objects (Lk 14:12-14).<\/p>\n<h5>The Call to Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The Israelites are without exception a sinful people, all of them needing the salvation that Jesus brings (Mt 1:21; Lk 1:77). In demonstration of God’s grace, Jesus proclaimed his gospel to the entire nation (Mt 4:23; 9:35; 15:24; Lk 4:43; 9:6; 20:1). From the most respectable to the least, all are summoned to submit to God’s rule, all are invited to come and partake freely of the banquet he has spread (Lk 14:16-24). But the gift of salvation must be received if it is to be experienced (Mk 10:15). And while it is indeed a gift that costs nothing, it is also a priceless treasure for which a wise person will freely sacrifice everything else (Mt 13:44-46), a sacrifice exceeded only by the cost of rejecting the gospel (Mt 11:20-24; Mk 8:34-39; Lk 14:24, 33). “Repent and believe in the gospel,” Jesus commands (Mk 1:15). The self-righteous and the self-sufficient must be jolted out of their false sense of security and humbly recognize their need for God (Lk 6:24-26). Only then will Jesus’ message to the poor be seen as gospel. An announcement of liberation (4:18-19) is good news only to people who are enslaved and know they are. The command applies also to the destitute and the afflicted. Those among them who bemoan their lot must repent of their sins. But something further is needed for the response to be complete: a person cannot believe Jesus’ gospel without a commitment to the <em>Person<\/em> of Christ (Jn 3:16). Even those who are already “poor in spirit,” in the sense defined earlier, are not really “blessed” until they acknowledge the truth of Jesus’ claims (Mt 11:6) and commit themselves to a life of obedience on his terms (7:21-27). This prepares us for the next point.<\/p>\n<h5>Summary<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout Jesus’ earthly ministry, the theme of his gospel remains the dawning of God’s kingdom (Mt 4:23; 24:14; Lk 4:43; 16:16), a message that is preached almost exclusively to Jews (Mt 10:5-6; 15:24). Yet Jesus also provides glimpses into what the gospel was to become once his work on earth was accomplished: (1) In Mark 8:35 and 10:29 Jesus speaks of individuals who needed to make great sacrifices “for my sake and for the gospel.” While distinguished from each other, the person of Jesus and the gospel are here associated in the closest possible way. The time was approaching when the Proclaimer of the gospel would become the Proclaimed. (2) In Mark 13:10 and Matthew 24:14 (and the textually doubtful Mk 16:15) Jesus foretells the preaching of the gospel of the kingdom to the gentile nations. (3) In Mark 14, having interpreted a woman’s action (v 3) as an anointing of his body beforehand for burial (v 8), Jesus declares, “And truly, I say to you, wherever the gospel is preached in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her” (v 9, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 26:13). This statement strongly implies that both the person of Jesus and the event of his death will figure prominently in the message that is to be proclaimed; otherwise, it is strange that the gospel and this particular act should be so solemnly bound together. Thus, here in the text already is an indication of how crucial Jesus’ death is both for the provision of the salvation announced in his gospel (cf. Mk 14:22-24) and for the launching of the evangelistic mission to the Gentiles (Mt 20:28 is vital for explaining the shift from Mt 15:24 to 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelafterJesusResurrection\">The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p>After the resurrection of Jesus, the gospel was proclaimed by his eyewitnesses. The contents of this gospel are recorded in the book of Acts and in Paul’s letters. Of the 43 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelizomai<\/span> (“evangelize”) beyond the Gospels, 15 occur in Acts and 21 in Paul’s writings; of the 64 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelion<\/span> (“gospel”), 2 occur in Acts and no fewer than 60 in Paul.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Having risen from the dead, Jesus Christ again evangelizes (Eph 2:16-17), doing so now through his appointed representatives (Rom 15:16-18; 1 Cor 1:17; 9:12-18; Gal 4:13-14; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:9-11). More than that, Christ has become the central theme of the gospel; the Proclaimer is now the Proclaimed. This is repeatedly affirmed in Acts (5:42; 8:4-5, 35; 11:20; 17:18) and in Paul’s writings (Rom 1:1-4; 10:8-17; 15:19-20; 2 Cor 4:4-6; 11:4; Gal 1:16; Eph 3:8; Phil 1:15-18; 2 Tm 2:8). The NT always speaks of <em>the gospel<\/em>—never the gospels—of Christ. A second gospel is as inconceivable and as unnecessary as a second Christ. This is the one gospel that God authorizes (e.g., Rom 1:1-17) and proclaims (e.g., 2 Thes 2:13-14). Galatians 2:7-9 speaks not of two gospels but of two mission fields. Paul (the apostle to the uncircumcised) and Peter (the apostle to the circumcised) are both entrusted with “the gospel of Christ” (Gal 1:7; cf. 1 Cor 15:1-11), the message that God has ordained for the salvation of Jews and Gentiles alike (Rom 1:16). The “different gospel” that Paul denounces in Galatians 1:6-9 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is not another gospel about Jesus but a message about “another Jesus”—not the real one, but one who exists only in the minds and the messages of those who proclaim him. To preach the true Christ is to preach the true gospel, however questionable one’s motives (Phil 1:15-18, 27), and to respond rightly to the gospel is to turn to Christ (Acts 11:20-21; Rom 10:8-17; Gal 2:14-16).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Witness to Saving Events<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel bears witness to every aspect of Christ’s saving work, from his birth (Rom 1:3; 2 Tm 2:8) and public ministry (Mk 1:1; Acts 10:36-38) to his second coming (Col 1:5, 23; cf. 3:1-4; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and the last judgment (Rom 2:16). But it is the death and the resurrection of Christ that are most crucial for the accomplishment of salvation, and that are therefore most prominent in the gospel’s witness. These are the events with which Mark’s proclamation climaxes (chs 15–16), and for which everything else prepares (8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34; 12:6-8); special stress is placed upon Jesus’ death as the means of salvation from sin (10:45; 14:3-9, 22-24). In Paul’s gospel, too, the death and resurrection of Jesus are central (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:1-4), with the cross occupying the very center (1 Cor 1:17–2:5). Had Christ not risen from the dead, Paul argues, the preaching of the cross would be a waste of time (1 Cor 15:14, 17; cf. Rom 6:3-11). However, now that Christ has risen, his death deserves special emphasis as the place where God provides atonement for sins (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 2 Cor 5:14-21; Eph 1:7). The gospel according to Acts proclaims Jesus’ death (Acts 8:25; 20:24, 28; cf. 10:36-43) and preeminently his resurrection, the event by which he conquered death and was exalted as Lord and coming Judge (10:36-43; 13:32-33; 17:18, 31). According to 1 Peter, the bearers of the gospel (1 Pt 1:12) concentrated, as had the OT prophets, on “the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glory” (1:11; cf. 1:18-19; 2:21-24; 3:18-22).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Power for Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel is much more than a report of past events and an exposition of doctrine. Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 1:17-18 and again in Romans 1:16 that the gospel is “the power of God”—not merely a witness to his power but an <em>expression<\/em> of his power. Thus, it cannot be fettered (2 Tm 2:8-9). “Our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power,” Paul writes in 1 Thessalonians 1:5. His point is not that the gospel was accompanied by mighty works (though this happened; cf. Rom 15:18-19), but that the gospel itself is a mighty work. God makes it so through his Holy Spirit (Rom 15:18-19; 1 Cor 2:1-5; 1 Thes 1:6). Furthermore, God’s singular purpose in exercising his power is to change people’s lives, to liberate them from sin and death, and to reconcile them to himself—in short, to save them. The gospel has power to effect the salvation it announces and to impart the life it promises (e.g., Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-18; 15:1-2; Eph 1:13; 2 Thes 2:13-14; 2 Tm 1:8-11; 1 Pt 1:23-25). If people are to experience salvation, they must hear and believe the gospel. It is precisely in and through this message that the saving power manifested in the person and work of Christ (especially in his death and resurrection) is conveyed to men and made effective in their lives. Similarly it is in association with the gospel, or as a direct result of the reception of the gospel, that the Holy Spirit is imparted to believers (Acts 10:36-44; 15:7-8; 2 Cor 11:4; Gal 3:1-2). In short, the gospel is the decisive place of encounter between the sinner and God the Savior.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>According to Peter’s testimony at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:7-11), an essential part of the gospel—for Gentiles and Jews alike—is salvation “through the grace of the Lord Jesus.” Toward the close of his missionary career, Paul states that his basic concern has been “to testify to the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24, <span>rsv<\/span>). This statement can be understood only in relation to Paul’s concept of the righteousness of God, particularly as set forth in Romans. Paul is here not merely expounding a divine attribute. Rather, he is dramatizing a divine activity—the manifestation of God’s righteousness now, “in the present time” (Rom 3:26), in the new age inaugurated by the coming of Jesus. The manifestation is twofold. Viewing the two aspects together, and doing so in the light of the gospel declared by Isaiah and by Jesus (both of whom strongly influenced Paul), respectively, will help us to understand why Paul speaks of “the gospel of the grace of God.”<\/p>\n<p>First, the gospel is a <em>witness<\/em> to God’s grace. In offering his Son as a sacrifice for sins (Rom 3:25a), God demonstrates his righteousness (vv 25b-26). That is, in the death of Jesus sins formerly “passed over” (v 25c) become the object of God’s wrath (cf. 1:18) and judgment. Yet in the very place where God deals justly and decisively with sins, he shows his grace to sinners. For the judgment against sin is focused not upon the sinners themselves but upon the One appointed to act on their behalf and to stand in their place (Rom 4:25; 5:6, 11; cf. 2 Cor 5:21; Gal 3:13). On this basis, sinners are freely pardoned (Rom 3:24). “The grace of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 15:11) toward the sinful is also in evidence, for he willingly bears their iniquities and suffers the consequences of their wrongdoing (Gal 2:20; cf. 2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the gospel is a <em>channel<\/em> of God’s grace. “The righteousness of God is revealed” in the gospel, says Paul (Rom 1:17). By this he means, not that the gospel talks about the righteousness of God (though it does), but that God’s righteousness is actively at work in the gospel. This activity in turn explains how the gospel becomes “the power of God for salvation” (v 16). And just how does God demonstrate his righteousness at this stage? In short, by bestowing it as a free gift on sinful human beings. It remains the righteousness of God, but by God’s grace, it is a righteousness in which humans may share. Furthermore, partaking of God’s righteousness depends on being personally united with Jesus Christ. In Paul’s view the saved person is one who has been acquitted, justified, “declared righteous” by God the judge. The basis for the verdict is not that I in myself am righteous (God justifies the ungodly, Rom 4:5). Nor does God treat me as though I were righteous. According to Paul I am declared righteous because I really <em>am<\/em> righteous—not in myself but in Christ (1 Cor 1:30; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9). This union is established through the revelation—and the free offer—of God’s righteousness in the gospel (Rom 1:16-17).<\/p>\n<h5>Responding to the Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel calls for a threefold response:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>Believing.<\/em> The gospel, says Paul, is “the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith” (Rom 1:16). For Paul, faith is the abandonment of all reliance upon “works of law” for justification (3:28) and utter dependence upon the grace of God as demonstrated in the work of Christ, especially his death (v 25). Accordingly, the “different gospel” of Galatians 1:6 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is spurious, for it preaches salvation by personal merit rather than (or together with) the work of Christ (cf. Gal 2:16). Ultimately faith rests upon God (Rom 4:24; 1 Thes 1:8-9) and upon Christ (Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 2:16, 20). Yet it is imperative that one believe the gospel also (Acts 8:12; 11:20-21; 15:7; Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-24; Phil 1:27; Heb 4:2), for it is just by this means that God’s salvation is made known and mediated. Moreover, believing the gospel entails repentance (Acts 14:15; 20:21, 24; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and obedience (Rom 1:5; 15:16-18; Heb 4:6). Those who refuse to obey the gospel are imperiling their lives (2 Thes 1:5-10; 1 Pt 4:17).<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Growing.<\/em> The Gospel is more than a message to be received—it is also a place in which to stand (1 Cor 15:1-2). It is sustainer of life as well as giver of life. One grows as a Christian not by turning from the gospel to other things (to turn away from the gospel is to abandon God and Christ, Gal 1:6), but by going ever more deeply into the gospel. In Romans 1:15 Paul expresses his eagerness to proclaim the gospel to the Christians in Rome. In the following chapters, anticipating his visit, he offers one of his most profound expositions of the gospel—one whose truth has never been fathomed and whose power has never been exhausted.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Hoping.<\/em> “The hope of the gospel” (Col 1:23) includes not only the return of Christ and the glory of heaven (Col 1:5; 3:1-4; 2 Thes 2:14-16) but the final judgment as well. For those who embrace the gospel, the last judgment holds no terrors, because the Judge is the very one who rescues them from the wrath to come (1 Thes 1:10). Those who are united to him need not dread condemnation now or at the end (Rom 8:1). Instead, the last judgment will mark their final vindication (1 Cor 4:5; Gal 5:5). Accordingly, this theme is not just a corollary but an integral part of the Good News (Rom 2:16). Those who have died since believing the gospel (1 Pt 4:6) may seem to have suffered a fate common to all people, or even the condemnation reserved for the lawless; in fact, their response to the gospel assures them of approval by the coming Lord (4:5-6; 5:4) and of a share in the imperishable inheritance of heaven (1:4).<\/p>","summary_ro":"GOSPEL Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon godspell denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.” Preview • The Gospel Message of Isaiah • The Gospel in the New Testament • The Good News of Christ’s Coming • The Gospel according to Jesus • The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection The Gospel Message of Isaiah Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his...","summary_en":"GOSPEL Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon godspell denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.” Preview • The Gospel Message of Isaiah • The Gospel in the New Testament • The Good News of Christ’s Coming • The Gospel according to Jesus • The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection The Gospel Message of Isaiah Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21912,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Kingdom of Heaven Kingdom of God","title_en":"Kingdom of Heaven Kingdom of God","content_ro":"<h3>KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>• In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughout Galilee teaching in the synagogues, preaching everywhere the Good News about the Kingdom” (Mt 4:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Sermon on the Mount is concerned with the righteousness that qualifies people to enter the kingdom of God (5:20). The collection of parables in Matthew 13 and Mark 4 illustrate the “mystery” of the kingdom of God (Mt 13:11; Mk 4:11). The establishment of the Lord’s Supper looks forward to the establishment of the kingdom of God (Mt 26:29; Mk 14:25).<\/p>\n<p>The NT reports two different forms of the expression: “the kingdom of God” and “the kingdom of the heavens.” The latter is found only in Matthew, but Matthew also has “the kingdom of God” four times (Mt 12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43). “The kingdom of heaven” is a Semitic phrase that would have been meaningful to Jews but not to Greeks. The Jews, out of reverence for God, avoided uttering the divine name, and contemporary literature gives examples of substituting the word “heaven” for God (1 Macc 3:18, 50; 4:10; see Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>The key to an understanding of the kingdom of God is that the basic meaning of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span><em>,<\/em> as also of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>,<\/em> is rule, reign, dominion. We frequently find in the OT the expression “in the year of the kingdom of . . . ,” meaning in the year of the reign of a given king (e.g., 1 Chr 26:31; 2 Chr 3:2; 15:10; Ezr 7:1; 8:1; Est 2:16; Jer 10:7; 52:31). When we read that Solomon’s kingdom was firmly established (1 Kgs 2:12), we are to understand that his authority to reign was settled. To “turn the kingdom of Saul over to [David]” (1 Chr 12:23, <span>kjv<\/span>) indicates that the authority that had been Saul’s was given to David. As a result of having received legal authority, David became king. This abstract idea of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is evident when it is found in parallelisms with such ideas as power, might, glory, and dominion (Dn 4:34; 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>When <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is used of God, it almost always refers to his authority or to his rule as the heavenly King. “They will talk together about the glory of your kingdom; they will celebrate examples of your power. . . . For your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. You rule generation after generation” (Ps 145:11, 13, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Further, if a king rules, there must be a realm or sphere over which he reigns. This is also called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>.<\/em> “So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet, for his God gave him rest round about” (2 Chr 20:30, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Est 3:6; Jer 10:7; Dn 9:1; 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>This same twofold use of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> is found in the NT. In fact, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> could be translated by the expression “kingly power” in Luke 23:42 (<span>niv<\/span> mg) and by “kingship” in John 18:36. When a nobleman went into a far country to get a “kingdom” (Luke 19:12, <span>nasb<\/span>) he went to the governing authority to get an appointment as king. When Jesus said, “My kingship is not of this world” (Jn 18:36, <span>rsv<\/span>), he did not mean to say that his rule has nothing to do with the world but rather that his kingship—his dominion—does not come from man but from God. Therefore, he rejects the use of worldly fighting to gain his ends.<\/p>\n<p>This central meaning of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> makes it easy to understand many sayings in the Gospels. In the Lord’s Prayer the petition “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10) is a prayer for God to manifest his reign so that his will may be done on earth as it is in heaven. When we read that we are to “receive the kingdom of God like a child” (Mk 10:15, <span>rsv<\/span>), we must open our hearts and lives to the rule of God.<\/p>\n<p>Also in the NT are sayings about being <em>in<\/em> the kingdom or of <em>entering<\/em> the kingdom (Mt 8:11; Mk 9:47; 10:23-25; Lk 13:28). There is no philological or theological objection to understanding “the kingdom of God” first as the divine reign or rule and second as the sphere of blessing in which that reign is experienced.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentBackground\">Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>The expression “the kingdom of God” is not found in the OT, but the idea appears throughout the prophets. God is frequently spoken of as the King, both of Israel (Ex 15:18; Nm 23:21; Dt 33:5; Is 43:15) and of all the earth (2 Kgs 19:15; Pss 29:10; 47:2; 93:1-2; 96:10; 97:1-9; 99:1-4; 145:11-13; Is 6:5; Jer 46:18). Although God is not the earthly King of Israel, other references speak of a day when God shall become King and shall rule over his people (Is 24:23; 33:22; 52:7; Ob 1:21; Zep 3:15; Zec 14:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>This brief summary of God’s kingship provides the outline for the entire OT concept. While God is King over all the earth, he is in a special way King over his people, Israel. God’s rule is therefore something realized in Israel’s history. However, it is only partially and imperfectly realized. Israel again and again rebelled against the divine sovereignty. Furthermore, Israel was constantly plagued by wars with its pagan neighbors in which it was not always victorious. Again, there are evils in nature and the physical world that often bring suffering to God’s people. Therefore, the prophets look forward to a day when God’s rule will be fully experienced, not by Israel alone, but by all the world. The main emphasis of the prophets is on hope, the establishing of God’s perfect rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets describe the final establishment of God’s kingdom in terms of a theophany—a divine visitation (Mi 1:3-4). Zechariah foresees a “Day of the Lord” when all nations will be gathered in battle against Jerusalem, when the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations (Zec 14:3, 5). Israel will be visited by the Lord (Is 29:6) and delivered from its enemies (35:4; 59:20). God’s coming will also mean judgment (2:21; 26:21). This final coming of God will mean the salvation of the Gentiles as well as of Israel (Zec 2:10-11; cf. Is 66:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>Behind this language is a distinct theology of “the God who comes.” It is a fact widely recognized in contemporary OT theology that the God of the OT is not a nature god, like the gods of other peoples, but a God of history—a God who visits his people in history to bless or to judge them. God visited Israel in Egypt to deliver them from bondage and to constitute them as his people. The rescue from Egypt was not merely an act of deliverance; it was an act through which God made himself known and through which Israel was to know and serve him.<\/p>\n<p>Because God has visited his people again and again in their history, he must finally come to them in the future to judge wickedness and to establish his kingdom. Israel’s hope is thus rooted in history, or rather in the God who works in history. God will finally break into history in a glorious theophany to establish his rule in all the earth. The source of the kingdom is not history itself but God.<\/p>\n<p>While the prophets visualize the kingdom as coming from God, the kingdom is always on earth. The divine irruption into the natural order is not designed to accomplish its destruction but to make way for a new, perfect order arising out of the old, imperfect one. The prophets do not present a single consistent picture of the new order. Sometimes the new order is described very much in this-worldly terms. “The terraced vineyards on the hills of Israel will drip with sweet wine” (Am 9:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). On the other hand, God will create new heavens and a new earth (Is 65:17; 66:22), where there will be untroubled joy, prosperity, peace, and righteousness. The final visitation of God will mean the redemption of the world, for a redeemed earth is the scene of the kingdom of God. The prophets look forward again and again to the deliverance of creation “from the bondage to decay.” The description is often couched in simple physical terms. The wilderness will become fruitful (32:15); the desert will blossom (35:2); sorrow and sighing will flee away (v 10). The burning sands will be cooled and the dry places become springs of water (v 7); peace will return to the animal world so that all injury and destruction are done away with (11:6). All this results because the earth becomes full of the knowledge of God (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Such language is not mere poetry but reflects a profound theology of creation. Humans as creatures were made to dwell on the earth, and the earth shares in human destiny. The main point is that creation as such is good and not a hindrance to true spirituality, as was often true in Greek thought. Redemption always includes redemption of the earth, which then becomes the blessed environment God intended it to be. Salvation does not mean deliverance from creaturehood, for this is not an evil thing but an essential and permanent element of true, human existence. Salvation does not mean escape from bodily creaturely existence, as in some Greek thought. On the contrary, ultimate redemption will mean the redemption of the whole person. The emergence of the doctrine of bodily resurrection is a reflection of this theology of creaturehood. The corollary of this is that creation in its entirety must share in the blessing of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>A distinctive element in prophetic eschatology is the tension between history and eschatology. That is, as the prophets looked into the future, they saw an immediate historical judgment as well as a more remote eschatological visitation. For Amos, the Day of the Lord is both the immediate judgment of Israel by the Assyrians and a final eschatological salvation. Joel sees an imminent historical visitation of drought and locusts, but beyond this he sees the eschatological Day of the Lord. Zephaniah sees an imminent Day of the Lord in some undesignated historical visitation (Zep 1:2-18), but beyond it he sees the salvation of the Gentiles (3:9). The same God who acts in history to bless and judge his people will act at the end of history in an eschatological act of judgment and salvation. The prophets do not sharply distinguish between these two days, for it is one and the same God who is concerned to judge and save his people.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological hope of the prophets is always an ethical hope. That is to say, the prophets are not interested in the future for its own sake but for the impact of the future on the present. The prophetic predictions were given that, in light of future judgment and salvation, Israel might be confronted in the present by the will of God. “Prepare to meet your God as he comes in judgment, you people of Israel” (Am 4:12, <span>nlt<\/span>) might well be taken as the keynote of all the prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom of God embodied the same contrast between the present order and the future age as that of the prophets, and he expressed it in the idiom “this age and the age to come.” This fact is obscured in the <span>kjv<\/span>, which translates the word for “age” by “world.” These are, however, two different concepts. A rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). The context makes it clear that he was asking about eschatological life—the life of the resurrection (Dn 12:2). Jesus speaks of the difficulty of entering the kingdom of God. (The parallel passage in Matthew 19:23-24 has both “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven,” proving that they are interchangeable terms.) In their reaction the disciples ask, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus’ answer contrasts the lot of his disciples “in this time” with the “age to come” (Mk 10:29-30) when they would inherit eternal life. It is clear from this passage that in some sense the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, salvation, and eternal life all belong to the age to come. So far as this saying is concerned, God’s people will not experience eternal life until they do so in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew alone records the expression “the close of the age.” This age will be terminated by the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 24:3) and by the judgment of humanity (13:39-42). Then the righteous will be separated from the wicked (v 49). The same expression occurs in the promise of the risen Jesus assuring his disciples of his presence until the consummation of the age (28:20). It follows that if this age is to come to its consummation, it must be followed by another age—the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological kingdom will be inaugurated by an apocalyptic event—the glorious coming of the Son of Man. This is made clear by two of the parables about the kingdom of God. In the parable of the tares, “the Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire” (Mt 13:41-42, <span>rsv<\/span>). The parable of the sheep and goats reflects the same eschatology. When the Son of Man comes in his glory, he will sit on his glorious throne to judge the nations, separating the sheep from the goats. The righteous—the sheep—are to “inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world”; and entrance into the kingdom is synonymous with entrance into life (25:31-46, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological character of the kingdom of God is seen also in the other two parables of Matthew 25. “The kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom” (v 1, <span>rsv<\/span>). However, five of them were foolish and did not provide an adequate supply of oil for their lamps. Thus they were late for the wedding and were excluded from the wedding feast—a symbol of the eschatological kingdom—while those properly prepared entered the kingdom. In the same way the two faithful servants who had been “faithful over a little” were granted to “enter into the joy of your master” (vv 21, 23), while the unfaithful servant was excluded from the kingdom and cast into outer darkness.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus almost never showed any interest in descriptions of the eschatological kingdom, but it is clear that its coming was constantly in his thoughts. The pure in heart will see God (Mt 5:8). The harvest will take place and the grain will be gathered into the barn (13:30, 39; Mk 4:29). Jesus frequently used the metaphor of a feast or table fellowship to describe life in the eschatological kingdom. He will drink wine again with his disciples in the kingdom of God. They will eat and drink at Jesus’ table in the kingdom (Lk 22:30). People will be gathered from all corners of the earth to sit at a table with the OT saints (Mt 8:11-12; Lk 13:29). The consummation is likened to a wedding feast (Mt 22:1-14) and a banquet (Lk 14:16-24). All of these metaphors picture the restoration of communion between God and people, a union that had been broken by sin.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the sayings cited to illustrate the future character of the kingdom, “kingdom” refers to the eschatological order—the eschaton, the age to come. However, when Jesus taught his disciples to pray “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10), he was not referring to the new eschatological order; he was referring to the kingdom as God’s kingly rule, his reign. It is a prayer that God will effectively establish his sovereign rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>In his teaching about the kingdom of God as the apocalyptic consummation, Jesus does not differ essentially from the OT prophets. The most distinctive element in Jesus’ teaching—indeed, the fact that characterizes his entire mission and message—is the fact that in some real sense of the word, the kingdom of God has come in history in an utterly unexpected way. This sets Jesus’ teaching apart from all contemporary Jewish thought.<\/p>\n<p>This is seen first of all in his repeated teaching that his mission is a fulfillment of the OT messianic prophets. Mark summarizes Jesus’ message with the words “The Kingdom of God is near! Turn from your sins and believe this Good News!” (Mk 1:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). This saying can have one of two meanings. It may refer to the imminent coming of the apocalyptic kingdom. Matthew summarizes the message of John the Baptist with nearly the same words: “Turn from your sins and turn to God, because the Kingdom of Heaven is near” (Mt 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Baptist expounds what he means by the approach of the kingdom of God: “He is ready to separate the chaff from the grain with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, storing the grain in his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). John proclaimed an apocalyptic act; “unquenchable fire” can mean no strictly historical event but only an apocalyptic judgment. John expected Jesus to be the one in whom the cosmic event expected by the prophets would be carried out.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that this was also Jesus’ meaning. However, another interpretation is possible that is better supported by the actual course of his mission: “The time is fulfilled.” The messianic promises of the prophets were not only about to be fulfilled; they were actually in process of fulfillment in his mission. In Jesus, God was visiting his people. The hope of the prophets in some real sense was being realized.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of this can be seen in Luke’s introduction of Jesus’ ministry. Luke selects an event that occurred in Nazareth later in Jesus’ ministry (Lk 4:16-21) and places it at the beginning of his Gospel in order to sound this note of fulfillment. Jesus read from Isaiah a promise that looked forward to the messianic salvation: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he has appointed me to preach Good News to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released, that the blind will see, that the downtrodden will be freed from their oppressors, and that the time of the Lord’s favor has come” (vv 18-19, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then Jesus astonished his audience by the assertion “This Scripture has come true today before your very eyes!” (v 21, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Here was an amazing claim. John the Baptist had announced an apocalyptic visitation of God that would mean the fulfillment of the eschatological hope and the consummation of the messianic age. Jesus proclaimed that the messianic promise was actually being fulfilled in his person. This is no apocalyptic kingdom but a present salvation. In these words Jesus did not proclaim the imminence of the apocalyptic kingdom. Rather, he boldly announced that the kingdom of God had come. The presence of the kingdom was a happening, an event, the gracious action of God. This was no new theology or new idea or new promise; it was a new event in history.<\/p>\n<p>The note of fulfillment is again sounded in Jesus’ answer to the question about fasting. “Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can’t fast while they are with the groom” (Mk 2:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). The marriage feast had become a metaphor in Judaism for the messianic consummation. In these words Jesus announced the presence of the messianic time of salvation. It would be a contradiction in terms for the disciples to fast when they were enjoying the blessings of the messianic age. The time of fulfillment had come.<\/p>\n<p>A saying found in different contexts in Matthew and Luke touches this central note of the fulfillment in history of the OT hope: “Blessed are the eyes which see what you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it” (Lk 10:23-24, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 13:16-17). Both Matthew and Luke associate this saying with the kingdom of God, and both agree that the hope of former generations has become an object of experience. Many prophets and kings looked forward to something, but they looked in vain, for it did not come to them. What they longed for has now come, and this can be nothing less than the promised messianic salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Fulfillment in history is again asserted in Jesus’ answer to John’s question about the one who is to come (Mt 11:2-3). “The deeds of the Christ” (Messiah) were not the deeds John had announced. Wicked rulers like Herod were not being judged in fire. Instead, Jesus was helping people, not bringing an apocalyptic kingdom. Jesus replied in words that echo the promise of the messianic salvation in Isaiah 35:5-6: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Mt 11:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). In these words Jesus claimed that the blessings of the messianic salvation are present. There was indeed reason for John’s perplexity, for the fulfillment was not taking place along expected lines. The apocalyptic consummation did not appear to be on the horizon. The point of Jesus’ answer was that fulfillment was taking place without the eschatological consummation. Therefore, Jesus pronounced a special blessing upon those who were not offended by the character of the messianic fulfillment (v 6). The fulfillment was indeed taking place, but not the apocalyptic consummation.<\/p>\n<p>The most unambiguous statement of the presence of the kingdom is found in the words about the binding of Satan. One of Jesus’ most characteristic acts was the exorcism of demons—deliverance from satanic power. The Pharisees admitted his power but attributed it to Satan. Jesus replied, “If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? . . . But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God is come upon you” (Mt 12:26, 28, <span>rsv<\/span>). Here the verb has the clear meaning “to come, to arrive” (cf. Rom 9:30; 2 Cor 10:14; Phil 3:16). Here is a clear affirmation that the kingdom of God has come among men.<\/p>\n<p>In explanation Jesus said, “Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house” (Mt 12:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). The strong man is Satan; this “present evil age” (Gal 1:4) is his “house”; his “goods” are demon-possessed men and women. Jesus has invaded the strong man’s house to snatch away from him men and women whom he has in his power, and this is the work of the kingdom of God. The kingly reign of God has come into history in the person of Jesus before the apocalyptic consummation when Satan will be destroyed, to render Satan a preliminary defeat. Jesus has already “bound” Satan (i.e., curbed his power). This has been accomplished by the presence of the kingdom of God in the mission of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A similar saying is found in Luke 10:18. Jesus had sent a band of his disciples on a preaching mission. Like Jesus, they were to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom of God (Lk 10:9). They, too, were to exorcize demons. When they returned to Jesus to report their success, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>). This again is metaphorical language that asserts that in the mission of Jesus’ disciples, as well as in Jesus himself, Satan has fallen from his place of power. Both “binding” and “falling” are metaphors that describe the same truth: the victory of the kingdom of God over Satan.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the element that sets Jesus apart from the OT and from all of contemporary Judaism. The prophets conceived of the kingdom being established by a heavenly supernatural being (Dn 7) or ruled by a powerful Davidic messianic king (Is 9, 11). The fulfillment of the messianic hope is everywhere in the prophets an eschatological hope. The same is true of the Jewish writers who despaired of history and cast all hope into the future.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to all that had gone before him, Jesus proclaimed the kingdom of God as an event taking place in his own person and mission. God had again assumed the initiative; God was acting. No first-century Jew had any idea of the kingdom of God coming into history in the person of an ordinary man—a teacher who was meek and lowly.<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the kingdom is further seen in the fact that the rule of God, present in Jesus, is a gift to be received. This is also true of the kingdom in its eschatological consummation, where the kingdom is freely inherited by the righteous (Mt 25:34). In answer to the young man’s question about inheriting eternal life (Mk 10:17), Jesus spoke of entering the kingdom (vv 23-24) and receiving the gift of eternal life (v 30) as though they were synonymous. The kingdom is a gift that the Father is pleased to bestow upon the little flock of Jesus’ disciples (Lk 12:32).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s eschatological rule brings to his people the blessings of that kingdom, and if God’s kingdom is his rule invading history before the eschatological consummation, then we may expect God’s rule in the present to bring a preliminary blessing to his people. This fact is reflected in numerous sayings. The kingdom is something to be sought here and now (Mt 6:33) and to be received as children receive a gift (Mk 10:15; Lk 18:16-17). Although it is present in an unexpected form, the kingdom of God in Jesus’ person is like a hidden treasure or a pearl of great price whose possession outranks all other goods (Mt 13:44-46). The gift of the kingdom is also seen in that the deaf hear, the blind see, lepers are cleansed, and the poor have good news preached to them (11:5).<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>In the Gospel of John the concept of eternal life takes the place of the kingdom of God in Jesus’ teaching. The kingdom of God is mentioned twice (Jn 3:3, 5), and it is placed in connection with eternal life. The kingdom of God is here the eschatological kingdom, and eternal life is the life of the kingdom. Thus, as the kingdom of God in the synoptic Gospels is both future and present, so eternal life is both the life of the age to come (12:25) and also a present blessing (3:16, etc.).<\/p>\n<h5>Acts<\/h5>\n<p>In Acts it seems the earliest disciples generally failed to understand Jesus’ message about the kingdom of God as a present spiritual blessing. They gathered together to await the coming of the eschatological kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6). Acts relates that the disciples continued to preach the kingdom of God, but usually it is an eschatological blessing (8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). However, the last two references make the kingdom of God synonymous with the gospel about Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>One important theme in Acts is linked to that of the kingdom of God. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter announces that God has seated Jesus at his right hand in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1 (Acts 2:33-35). In the Psalms this is a prophecy of the enthronement of the Davidic king in Jerusalem. Peter asserts that this prophecy is now fulfilled in the heavenly reign of Jesus. Therefore, he has been made both Lord and Christ (Messiah). These are interchangeable terms, “Lord” meaning absolute sovereign, “Christ” meaning the messianic king.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>Paul carried further this theme of the heavenly rule of Christ, the anointed King. The kingdom is both an eschatological inheritance (1 Cor 6:9; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; 1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 1:5; 2 Tm 4:1, 18) and a present blessing into which believers now enter (Rom 14:17; Col 1:13). The key to this is the interchangeable character of lordship and messianic kingship. Jesus is now exalted as Lord over all (Phil 2:11), and even as his lordship is invisible, it will become manifest to all at his second coming. In the same way, he has been enthroned as messianic King by virtue of his resurrection and heavenly session, and he must reign as King until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:22). The last enemy to be destroyed is death.<\/p>\n<h5>Revelation<\/h5>\n<p>The central message of the Revelation to John is the consummation of God’s redemptive purpose, when the kingdom of this world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Revelation pictures the plight of a persecuted church in a hostile world, but it assures the church that Christ has already won a victory over the powers of evil (5:5), by virtue of which he can finally destroy them (19:11–20:14). Again, the last enemy to be destroyed is death (20:13-14). Revelation closes with a highly symbolic picture of the kingdom of God (chs 21–22) when God comes to dwell among his people, and “they shall see his face” (22:4). Thus the NT ends: divine order is restored to a disordered world. This is the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Teachings of; King; Parable.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>• In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughout Galilee teaching in the synagogues, preaching everywhere the Good News about the Kingdom” (Mt 4:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Sermon on the Mount is concerned with the righteousness that qualifies people to enter the kingdom of God (5:20). The collection of parables in Matthew 13 and Mark 4 illustrate the “mystery” of the kingdom of God (Mt 13:11; Mk 4:11). The establishment of the Lord’s Supper looks forward to the establishment of the kingdom of God (Mt 26:29; Mk 14:25).<\/p>\n<p>The NT reports two different forms of the expression: “the kingdom of God” and “the kingdom of the heavens.” The latter is found only in Matthew, but Matthew also has “the kingdom of God” four times (Mt 12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43). “The kingdom of heaven” is a Semitic phrase that would have been meaningful to Jews but not to Greeks. The Jews, out of reverence for God, avoided uttering the divine name, and contemporary literature gives examples of substituting the word “heaven” for God (1 Macc 3:18, 50; 4:10; see Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>The key to an understanding of the kingdom of God is that the basic meaning of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span><em>,<\/em> as also of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>,<\/em> is rule, reign, dominion. We frequently find in the OT the expression “in the year of the kingdom of . . . ,” meaning in the year of the reign of a given king (e.g., 1 Chr 26:31; 2 Chr 3:2; 15:10; Ezr 7:1; 8:1; Est 2:16; Jer 10:7; 52:31). When we read that Solomon’s kingdom was firmly established (1 Kgs 2:12), we are to understand that his authority to reign was settled. To “turn the kingdom of Saul over to [David]” (1 Chr 12:23, <span>kjv<\/span>) indicates that the authority that had been Saul’s was given to David. As a result of having received legal authority, David became king. This abstract idea of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is evident when it is found in parallelisms with such ideas as power, might, glory, and dominion (Dn 4:34; 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>When <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is used of God, it almost always refers to his authority or to his rule as the heavenly King. “They will talk together about the glory of your kingdom; they will celebrate examples of your power. . . . For your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. You rule generation after generation” (Ps 145:11, 13, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Further, if a king rules, there must be a realm or sphere over which he reigns. This is also called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>.<\/em> “So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet, for his God gave him rest round about” (2 Chr 20:30, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Est 3:6; Jer 10:7; Dn 9:1; 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>This same twofold use of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> is found in the NT. In fact, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> could be translated by the expression “kingly power” in Luke 23:42 (<span>niv<\/span> mg) and by “kingship” in John 18:36. When a nobleman went into a far country to get a “kingdom” (Luke 19:12, <span>nasb<\/span>) he went to the governing authority to get an appointment as king. When Jesus said, “My kingship is not of this world” (Jn 18:36, <span>rsv<\/span>), he did not mean to say that his rule has nothing to do with the world but rather that his kingship—his dominion—does not come from man but from God. Therefore, he rejects the use of worldly fighting to gain his ends.<\/p>\n<p>This central meaning of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> makes it easy to understand many sayings in the Gospels. In the Lord’s Prayer the petition “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10) is a prayer for God to manifest his reign so that his will may be done on earth as it is in heaven. When we read that we are to “receive the kingdom of God like a child” (Mk 10:15, <span>rsv<\/span>), we must open our hearts and lives to the rule of God.<\/p>\n<p>Also in the NT are sayings about being <em>in<\/em> the kingdom or of <em>entering<\/em> the kingdom (Mt 8:11; Mk 9:47; 10:23-25; Lk 13:28). There is no philological or theological objection to understanding “the kingdom of God” first as the divine reign or rule and second as the sphere of blessing in which that reign is experienced.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentBackground\">Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>The expression “the kingdom of God” is not found in the OT, but the idea appears throughout the prophets. God is frequently spoken of as the King, both of Israel (Ex 15:18; Nm 23:21; Dt 33:5; Is 43:15) and of all the earth (2 Kgs 19:15; Pss 29:10; 47:2; 93:1-2; 96:10; 97:1-9; 99:1-4; 145:11-13; Is 6:5; Jer 46:18). Although God is not the earthly King of Israel, other references speak of a day when God shall become King and shall rule over his people (Is 24:23; 33:22; 52:7; Ob 1:21; Zep 3:15; Zec 14:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>This brief summary of God’s kingship provides the outline for the entire OT concept. While God is King over all the earth, he is in a special way King over his people, Israel. God’s rule is therefore something realized in Israel’s history. However, it is only partially and imperfectly realized. Israel again and again rebelled against the divine sovereignty. Furthermore, Israel was constantly plagued by wars with its pagan neighbors in which it was not always victorious. Again, there are evils in nature and the physical world that often bring suffering to God’s people. Therefore, the prophets look forward to a day when God’s rule will be fully experienced, not by Israel alone, but by all the world. The main emphasis of the prophets is on hope, the establishing of God’s perfect rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets describe the final establishment of God’s kingdom in terms of a theophany—a divine visitation (Mi 1:3-4). Zechariah foresees a “Day of the Lord” when all nations will be gathered in battle against Jerusalem, when the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations (Zec 14:3, 5). Israel will be visited by the Lord (Is 29:6) and delivered from its enemies (35:4; 59:20). God’s coming will also mean judgment (2:21; 26:21). This final coming of God will mean the salvation of the Gentiles as well as of Israel (Zec 2:10-11; cf. Is 66:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>Behind this language is a distinct theology of “the God who comes.” It is a fact widely recognized in contemporary OT theology that the God of the OT is not a nature god, like the gods of other peoples, but a God of history—a God who visits his people in history to bless or to judge them. God visited Israel in Egypt to deliver them from bondage and to constitute them as his people. The rescue from Egypt was not merely an act of deliverance; it was an act through which God made himself known and through which Israel was to know and serve him.<\/p>\n<p>Because God has visited his people again and again in their history, he must finally come to them in the future to judge wickedness and to establish his kingdom. Israel’s hope is thus rooted in history, or rather in the God who works in history. God will finally break into history in a glorious theophany to establish his rule in all the earth. The source of the kingdom is not history itself but God.<\/p>\n<p>While the prophets visualize the kingdom as coming from God, the kingdom is always on earth. The divine irruption into the natural order is not designed to accomplish its destruction but to make way for a new, perfect order arising out of the old, imperfect one. The prophets do not present a single consistent picture of the new order. Sometimes the new order is described very much in this-worldly terms. “The terraced vineyards on the hills of Israel will drip with sweet wine” (Am 9:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). On the other hand, God will create new heavens and a new earth (Is 65:17; 66:22), where there will be untroubled joy, prosperity, peace, and righteousness. The final visitation of God will mean the redemption of the world, for a redeemed earth is the scene of the kingdom of God. The prophets look forward again and again to the deliverance of creation “from the bondage to decay.” The description is often couched in simple physical terms. The wilderness will become fruitful (32:15); the desert will blossom (35:2); sorrow and sighing will flee away (v 10). The burning sands will be cooled and the dry places become springs of water (v 7); peace will return to the animal world so that all injury and destruction are done away with (11:6). All this results because the earth becomes full of the knowledge of God (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Such language is not mere poetry but reflects a profound theology of creation. Humans as creatures were made to dwell on the earth, and the earth shares in human destiny. The main point is that creation as such is good and not a hindrance to true spirituality, as was often true in Greek thought. Redemption always includes redemption of the earth, which then becomes the blessed environment God intended it to be. Salvation does not mean deliverance from creaturehood, for this is not an evil thing but an essential and permanent element of true, human existence. Salvation does not mean escape from bodily creaturely existence, as in some Greek thought. On the contrary, ultimate redemption will mean the redemption of the whole person. The emergence of the doctrine of bodily resurrection is a reflection of this theology of creaturehood. The corollary of this is that creation in its entirety must share in the blessing of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>A distinctive element in prophetic eschatology is the tension between history and eschatology. That is, as the prophets looked into the future, they saw an immediate historical judgment as well as a more remote eschatological visitation. For Amos, the Day of the Lord is both the immediate judgment of Israel by the Assyrians and a final eschatological salvation. Joel sees an imminent historical visitation of drought and locusts, but beyond this he sees the eschatological Day of the Lord. Zephaniah sees an imminent Day of the Lord in some undesignated historical visitation (Zep 1:2-18), but beyond it he sees the salvation of the Gentiles (3:9). The same God who acts in history to bless and judge his people will act at the end of history in an eschatological act of judgment and salvation. The prophets do not sharply distinguish between these two days, for it is one and the same God who is concerned to judge and save his people.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological hope of the prophets is always an ethical hope. That is to say, the prophets are not interested in the future for its own sake but for the impact of the future on the present. The prophetic predictions were given that, in light of future judgment and salvation, Israel might be confronted in the present by the will of God. “Prepare to meet your God as he comes in judgment, you people of Israel” (Am 4:12, <span>nlt<\/span>) might well be taken as the keynote of all the prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom of God embodied the same contrast between the present order and the future age as that of the prophets, and he expressed it in the idiom “this age and the age to come.” This fact is obscured in the <span>kjv<\/span>, which translates the word for “age” by “world.” These are, however, two different concepts. A rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). The context makes it clear that he was asking about eschatological life—the life of the resurrection (Dn 12:2). Jesus speaks of the difficulty of entering the kingdom of God. (The parallel passage in Matthew 19:23-24 has both “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven,” proving that they are interchangeable terms.) In their reaction the disciples ask, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus’ answer contrasts the lot of his disciples “in this time” with the “age to come” (Mk 10:29-30) when they would inherit eternal life. It is clear from this passage that in some sense the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, salvation, and eternal life all belong to the age to come. So far as this saying is concerned, God’s people will not experience eternal life until they do so in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew alone records the expression “the close of the age.” This age will be terminated by the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 24:3) and by the judgment of humanity (13:39-42). Then the righteous will be separated from the wicked (v 49). The same expression occurs in the promise of the risen Jesus assuring his disciples of his presence until the consummation of the age (28:20). It follows that if this age is to come to its consummation, it must be followed by another age—the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological kingdom will be inaugurated by an apocalyptic event—the glorious coming of the Son of Man. This is made clear by two of the parables about the kingdom of God. In the parable of the tares, “the Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire” (Mt 13:41-42, <span>rsv<\/span>). The parable of the sheep and goats reflects the same eschatology. When the Son of Man comes in his glory, he will sit on his glorious throne to judge the nations, separating the sheep from the goats. The righteous—the sheep—are to “inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world”; and entrance into the kingdom is synonymous with entrance into life (25:31-46, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological character of the kingdom of God is seen also in the other two parables of Matthew 25. “The kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom” (v 1, <span>rsv<\/span>). However, five of them were foolish and did not provide an adequate supply of oil for their lamps. Thus they were late for the wedding and were excluded from the wedding feast—a symbol of the eschatological kingdom—while those properly prepared entered the kingdom. In the same way the two faithful servants who had been “faithful over a little” were granted to “enter into the joy of your master” (vv 21, 23), while the unfaithful servant was excluded from the kingdom and cast into outer darkness.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus almost never showed any interest in descriptions of the eschatological kingdom, but it is clear that its coming was constantly in his thoughts. The pure in heart will see God (Mt 5:8). The harvest will take place and the grain will be gathered into the barn (13:30, 39; Mk 4:29). Jesus frequently used the metaphor of a feast or table fellowship to describe life in the eschatological kingdom. He will drink wine again with his disciples in the kingdom of God. They will eat and drink at Jesus’ table in the kingdom (Lk 22:30). People will be gathered from all corners of the earth to sit at a table with the OT saints (Mt 8:11-12; Lk 13:29). The consummation is likened to a wedding feast (Mt 22:1-14) and a banquet (Lk 14:16-24). All of these metaphors picture the restoration of communion between God and people, a union that had been broken by sin.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the sayings cited to illustrate the future character of the kingdom, “kingdom” refers to the eschatological order—the eschaton, the age to come. However, when Jesus taught his disciples to pray “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10), he was not referring to the new eschatological order; he was referring to the kingdom as God’s kingly rule, his reign. It is a prayer that God will effectively establish his sovereign rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>In his teaching about the kingdom of God as the apocalyptic consummation, Jesus does not differ essentially from the OT prophets. The most distinctive element in Jesus’ teaching—indeed, the fact that characterizes his entire mission and message—is the fact that in some real sense of the word, the kingdom of God has come in history in an utterly unexpected way. This sets Jesus’ teaching apart from all contemporary Jewish thought.<\/p>\n<p>This is seen first of all in his repeated teaching that his mission is a fulfillment of the OT messianic prophets. Mark summarizes Jesus’ message with the words “The Kingdom of God is near! Turn from your sins and believe this Good News!” (Mk 1:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). This saying can have one of two meanings. It may refer to the imminent coming of the apocalyptic kingdom. Matthew summarizes the message of John the Baptist with nearly the same words: “Turn from your sins and turn to God, because the Kingdom of Heaven is near” (Mt 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Baptist expounds what he means by the approach of the kingdom of God: “He is ready to separate the chaff from the grain with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, storing the grain in his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). John proclaimed an apocalyptic act; “unquenchable fire” can mean no strictly historical event but only an apocalyptic judgment. John expected Jesus to be the one in whom the cosmic event expected by the prophets would be carried out.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that this was also Jesus’ meaning. However, another interpretation is possible that is better supported by the actual course of his mission: “The time is fulfilled.” The messianic promises of the prophets were not only about to be fulfilled; they were actually in process of fulfillment in his mission. In Jesus, God was visiting his people. The hope of the prophets in some real sense was being realized.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of this can be seen in Luke’s introduction of Jesus’ ministry. Luke selects an event that occurred in Nazareth later in Jesus’ ministry (Lk 4:16-21) and places it at the beginning of his Gospel in order to sound this note of fulfillment. Jesus read from Isaiah a promise that looked forward to the messianic salvation: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he has appointed me to preach Good News to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released, that the blind will see, that the downtrodden will be freed from their oppressors, and that the time of the Lord’s favor has come” (vv 18-19, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then Jesus astonished his audience by the assertion “This Scripture has come true today before your very eyes!” (v 21, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Here was an amazing claim. John the Baptist had announced an apocalyptic visitation of God that would mean the fulfillment of the eschatological hope and the consummation of the messianic age. Jesus proclaimed that the messianic promise was actually being fulfilled in his person. This is no apocalyptic kingdom but a present salvation. In these words Jesus did not proclaim the imminence of the apocalyptic kingdom. Rather, he boldly announced that the kingdom of God had come. The presence of the kingdom was a happening, an event, the gracious action of God. This was no new theology or new idea or new promise; it was a new event in history.<\/p>\n<p>The note of fulfillment is again sounded in Jesus’ answer to the question about fasting. “Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can’t fast while they are with the groom” (Mk 2:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). The marriage feast had become a metaphor in Judaism for the messianic consummation. In these words Jesus announced the presence of the messianic time of salvation. It would be a contradiction in terms for the disciples to fast when they were enjoying the blessings of the messianic age. The time of fulfillment had come.<\/p>\n<p>A saying found in different contexts in Matthew and Luke touches this central note of the fulfillment in history of the OT hope: “Blessed are the eyes which see what you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it” (Lk 10:23-24, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 13:16-17). Both Matthew and Luke associate this saying with the kingdom of God, and both agree that the hope of former generations has become an object of experience. Many prophets and kings looked forward to something, but they looked in vain, for it did not come to them. What they longed for has now come, and this can be nothing less than the promised messianic salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Fulfillment in history is again asserted in Jesus’ answer to John’s question about the one who is to come (Mt 11:2-3). “The deeds of the Christ” (Messiah) were not the deeds John had announced. Wicked rulers like Herod were not being judged in fire. Instead, Jesus was helping people, not bringing an apocalyptic kingdom. Jesus replied in words that echo the promise of the messianic salvation in Isaiah 35:5-6: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Mt 11:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). In these words Jesus claimed that the blessings of the messianic salvation are present. There was indeed reason for John’s perplexity, for the fulfillment was not taking place along expected lines. The apocalyptic consummation did not appear to be on the horizon. The point of Jesus’ answer was that fulfillment was taking place without the eschatological consummation. Therefore, Jesus pronounced a special blessing upon those who were not offended by the character of the messianic fulfillment (v 6). The fulfillment was indeed taking place, but not the apocalyptic consummation.<\/p>\n<p>The most unambiguous statement of the presence of the kingdom is found in the words about the binding of Satan. One of Jesus’ most characteristic acts was the exorcism of demons—deliverance from satanic power. The Pharisees admitted his power but attributed it to Satan. Jesus replied, “If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? . . . But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God is come upon you” (Mt 12:26, 28, <span>rsv<\/span>). Here the verb has the clear meaning “to come, to arrive” (cf. Rom 9:30; 2 Cor 10:14; Phil 3:16). Here is a clear affirmation that the kingdom of God has come among men.<\/p>\n<p>In explanation Jesus said, “Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house” (Mt 12:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). The strong man is Satan; this “present evil age” (Gal 1:4) is his “house”; his “goods” are demon-possessed men and women. Jesus has invaded the strong man’s house to snatch away from him men and women whom he has in his power, and this is the work of the kingdom of God. The kingly reign of God has come into history in the person of Jesus before the apocalyptic consummation when Satan will be destroyed, to render Satan a preliminary defeat. Jesus has already “bound” Satan (i.e., curbed his power). This has been accomplished by the presence of the kingdom of God in the mission of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A similar saying is found in Luke 10:18. Jesus had sent a band of his disciples on a preaching mission. Like Jesus, they were to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom of God (Lk 10:9). They, too, were to exorcize demons. When they returned to Jesus to report their success, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>). This again is metaphorical language that asserts that in the mission of Jesus’ disciples, as well as in Jesus himself, Satan has fallen from his place of power. Both “binding” and “falling” are metaphors that describe the same truth: the victory of the kingdom of God over Satan.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the element that sets Jesus apart from the OT and from all of contemporary Judaism. The prophets conceived of the kingdom being established by a heavenly supernatural being (Dn 7) or ruled by a powerful Davidic messianic king (Is 9, 11). The fulfillment of the messianic hope is everywhere in the prophets an eschatological hope. The same is true of the Jewish writers who despaired of history and cast all hope into the future.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to all that had gone before him, Jesus proclaimed the kingdom of God as an event taking place in his own person and mission. God had again assumed the initiative; God was acting. No first-century Jew had any idea of the kingdom of God coming into history in the person of an ordinary man—a teacher who was meek and lowly.<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the kingdom is further seen in the fact that the rule of God, present in Jesus, is a gift to be received. This is also true of the kingdom in its eschatological consummation, where the kingdom is freely inherited by the righteous (Mt 25:34). In answer to the young man’s question about inheriting eternal life (Mk 10:17), Jesus spoke of entering the kingdom (vv 23-24) and receiving the gift of eternal life (v 30) as though they were synonymous. The kingdom is a gift that the Father is pleased to bestow upon the little flock of Jesus’ disciples (Lk 12:32).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s eschatological rule brings to his people the blessings of that kingdom, and if God’s kingdom is his rule invading history before the eschatological consummation, then we may expect God’s rule in the present to bring a preliminary blessing to his people. This fact is reflected in numerous sayings. The kingdom is something to be sought here and now (Mt 6:33) and to be received as children receive a gift (Mk 10:15; Lk 18:16-17). Although it is present in an unexpected form, the kingdom of God in Jesus’ person is like a hidden treasure or a pearl of great price whose possession outranks all other goods (Mt 13:44-46). The gift of the kingdom is also seen in that the deaf hear, the blind see, lepers are cleansed, and the poor have good news preached to them (11:5).<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>In the Gospel of John the concept of eternal life takes the place of the kingdom of God in Jesus’ teaching. The kingdom of God is mentioned twice (Jn 3:3, 5), and it is placed in connection with eternal life. The kingdom of God is here the eschatological kingdom, and eternal life is the life of the kingdom. Thus, as the kingdom of God in the synoptic Gospels is both future and present, so eternal life is both the life of the age to come (12:25) and also a present blessing (3:16, etc.).<\/p>\n<h5>Acts<\/h5>\n<p>In Acts it seems the earliest disciples generally failed to understand Jesus’ message about the kingdom of God as a present spiritual blessing. They gathered together to await the coming of the eschatological kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6). Acts relates that the disciples continued to preach the kingdom of God, but usually it is an eschatological blessing (8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). However, the last two references make the kingdom of God synonymous with the gospel about Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>One important theme in Acts is linked to that of the kingdom of God. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter announces that God has seated Jesus at his right hand in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1 (Acts 2:33-35). In the Psalms this is a prophecy of the enthronement of the Davidic king in Jerusalem. Peter asserts that this prophecy is now fulfilled in the heavenly reign of Jesus. Therefore, he has been made both Lord and Christ (Messiah). These are interchangeable terms, “Lord” meaning absolute sovereign, “Christ” meaning the messianic king.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>Paul carried further this theme of the heavenly rule of Christ, the anointed King. The kingdom is both an eschatological inheritance (1 Cor 6:9; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; 1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 1:5; 2 Tm 4:1, 18) and a present blessing into which believers now enter (Rom 14:17; Col 1:13). The key to this is the interchangeable character of lordship and messianic kingship. Jesus is now exalted as Lord over all (Phil 2:11), and even as his lordship is invisible, it will become manifest to all at his second coming. In the same way, he has been enthroned as messianic King by virtue of his resurrection and heavenly session, and he must reign as King until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:22). The last enemy to be destroyed is death.<\/p>\n<h5>Revelation<\/h5>\n<p>The central message of the Revelation to John is the consummation of God’s redemptive purpose, when the kingdom of this world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Revelation pictures the plight of a persecuted church in a hostile world, but it assures the church that Christ has already won a victory over the powers of evil (5:5), by virtue of which he can finally destroy them (19:11–20:14). Again, the last enemy to be destroyed is death (20:13-14). Revelation closes with a highly symbolic picture of the kingdom of God (chs 21–22) when God comes to dwell among his people, and “they shall see his face” (22:4). Thus the NT ends: divine order is restored to a disordered world. This is the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Teachings of; King; Parable.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Preview • Introduction • Old Testament Background • In the New Testament Introduction According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughou...","summary_en":"KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Preview • Introduction • Old Testament Background • In the New Testament Introduction According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughou...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":30899,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"the Poor","title_en":"the Poor","content_ro":"<h3>POOR, T<span>he<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Those lacking material wealth.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PovertyasaBadThing\">Poverty as a Bad Thing<\/p>\n<p>At times the Bible gives a very simple explanation of why people are rich or poor. If a person delights in the law of the Lord, he or she will get wealth and riches. Such people will prosper in everything they do (Pss 1:3; 112:3). With regard to Israel in OT days, these ideas are not quite so naive as they might seem. There was indeed a connection between sin and poverty. Israelite society was built on rules laid down by God, so if there was poverty, that must mean that somewhere the rules were being broken.<\/p>\n<p>Whether a person’s poverty was due to his or her own sin or to someone else’s, the OT saw it as an evil to be combated, and the law made many provisions for the relief of it (e.g., Ex 22:21-27; Lv 19:9-10; Dt 15:1-15; 24:10-22). God cared for the needy and expected his people to do the same.<\/p>\n<p>During the period between the testaments, that care continued to be exercised within Jewish communities scattered around the Mediterranean, and it was in due course taken up as a practical responsibility by the Christian church (Acts 11:29; 24:17; Rom 15:26; 1 Cor 16:1; Gal 2:10; Jas 2:15-16; 1 Jn 3:17); for Christians also, the giving of alms was a duty plainly expected by their Lord (Mt 6:2-4; Lk 12:33). It was not really a primitive communism that the early church practiced, for had they renounced personal possessions, they could not have done what they in fact did—namely, to <em>give<\/em> in cash or in kind “as any had need” (Acts 2:45; 4:35).<\/p>\n<p>Poverty, then, although it provides the wealthy with a chance to show the virtue of generosity, is in itself (in the NT as in the OT) a bad thing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PovertyasaGoodThing\">Poverty as a Good Thing<\/p>\n<p>As we can see, there is a certain sense in which righteousness will make people prosperous and sin will make them poor. But ordinary life is more complicated than that. Psalms 1 and 112, referred to above, show only one side of the matter. What about the prosperity of the wicked (Ps 73:3) and its corollary, the person who is righteous yet poor? The answer of Scripture (e.g., Jb 21; Pss 37, 49, 73) is that the wealth of bad people is a fleeting thing and that the righteous, though poor in worldly goods, have spiritual riches.<\/p>\n<p>This thought—that far from being prosperous, the good person may often be poor—is sometimes curiously inverted. The righteous may be poor, but Scripture sometimes appears to reckon that to be poor is to be righteous. Of course, it is not automatically so (Prv 30:8-9), but such references are frequent enough, especially in the Psalms (e.g., Pss 9:18; 10:14; 12:5; 34:6; 35:10; 74:19), to deserve careful consideration. And on reflection, they are not so strange. As God is specially concerned about the poor, so the poor may be specially concerned about God, for two good reasons. First, if there was poverty in Israel, it was because those with power were misusing it; therefore, the poor would claim God’s help first because it is his rule that was being flouted, and he must vindicate himself. And second, poverty turns people to God because in those circumstances there is no one else to turn to. In this way “poor” becomes almost a technical term. “The poor” are the humble, and the humble are the godly (Pss 10:17; 14:5-6; 37:11; Zep 3:12-13). Just as being rich can foster self-indulgence, self-confidence, pride, and the despising and oppression of one’s fellow human beings, so being poor should encourage the opposite virtues.<\/p>\n<p>Instead of being an evil to be shunned, poverty thus becomes an ideal to be sought. Following the OT use of “the poor” and “the pious” as almost interchangeable terms, personal property was renounced by many Jews during the period between the testaments. Among them were the sect of the Essenes and the related community that was set up at Qumran near the Dead Sea. The latter actually called themselves “The Poor.” This tradition continued into NT times. Possibly “the poor” at Jerusalem means a definite group within the church there (or even the Jerusalem church as a whole; Rom 15:26; Gal 2:10). Certainly there emerged later a Jewish-Christian sect called the “Ebionites” (from a Hebrew word for “poor”).<\/p>\n<p>The NT teaches clearly, of course, that what really matters is the attitude of the heart. It is quite possible to be poor yet grasping, or rich yet generous. Even so, with the OT background outlined above, the general sense of these words in the Gospels is that rich = bad, poor = good. On the one hand, the Sadducees are rich in worldly wealth and the Pharisees in spiritual pride, and men of property are selfish, foolish, and in grave spiritual peril (Mk 10:23; Lk 12:13-21; 16:19-31). On the other hand, it is devout and simple folk, like Jesus’s own family and friends, who generally represent the poor.<\/p>\n<p>In truth, therefore, the two versions of the first beatitude (Matthew’s and Luke’s) amount to the same thing. Matthew’s has the depth: “Blessed are the poor in spirit” (Mt 5:3). But Luke’s has the breadth. When he says simply “Blessed are you poor” (Lk 6:20), he means those who in their need—in <em>any<\/em> kind of need—turn to the Lord. It was to bring the gospel to such people that Christ came into the world (Mt 11:5; Lk 4:18). Jesus Christ himself embodies the same ideal. As Paul put it, “Though he was very rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, so that by his poverty he could make you rich” (2 Cor 8:9, <span>nlt<\/span>). Our helpless poverty is an evil from which he comes to rescue us; his deliberately chosen poverty is the glorious means by which he does so.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Alms; Riches; Righteousness; Wages; Wealth.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>POOR, T<span>he<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Those lacking material wealth.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PovertyasaBadThing\">Poverty as a Bad Thing<\/p>\n<p>At times the Bible gives a very simple explanation of why people are rich or poor. If a person delights in the law of the Lord, he or she will get wealth and riches. Such people will prosper in everything they do (Pss 1:3; 112:3). With regard to Israel in OT days, these ideas are not quite so naive as they might seem. There was indeed a connection between sin and poverty. Israelite society was built on rules laid down by God, so if there was poverty, that must mean that somewhere the rules were being broken.<\/p>\n<p>Whether a person’s poverty was due to his or her own sin or to someone else’s, the OT saw it as an evil to be combated, and the law made many provisions for the relief of it (e.g., Ex 22:21-27; Lv 19:9-10; Dt 15:1-15; 24:10-22). God cared for the needy and expected his people to do the same.<\/p>\n<p>During the period between the testaments, that care continued to be exercised within Jewish communities scattered around the Mediterranean, and it was in due course taken up as a practical responsibility by the Christian church (Acts 11:29; 24:17; Rom 15:26; 1 Cor 16:1; Gal 2:10; Jas 2:15-16; 1 Jn 3:17); for Christians also, the giving of alms was a duty plainly expected by their Lord (Mt 6:2-4; Lk 12:33). It was not really a primitive communism that the early church practiced, for had they renounced personal possessions, they could not have done what they in fact did—namely, to <em>give<\/em> in cash or in kind “as any had need” (Acts 2:45; 4:35).<\/p>\n<p>Poverty, then, although it provides the wealthy with a chance to show the virtue of generosity, is in itself (in the NT as in the OT) a bad thing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PovertyasaGoodThing\">Poverty as a Good Thing<\/p>\n<p>As we can see, there is a certain sense in which righteousness will make people prosperous and sin will make them poor. But ordinary life is more complicated than that. Psalms 1 and 112, referred to above, show only one side of the matter. What about the prosperity of the wicked (Ps 73:3) and its corollary, the person who is righteous yet poor? The answer of Scripture (e.g., Jb 21; Pss 37, 49, 73) is that the wealth of bad people is a fleeting thing and that the righteous, though poor in worldly goods, have spiritual riches.<\/p>\n<p>This thought—that far from being prosperous, the good person may often be poor—is sometimes curiously inverted. The righteous may be poor, but Scripture sometimes appears to reckon that to be poor is to be righteous. Of course, it is not automatically so (Prv 30:8-9), but such references are frequent enough, especially in the Psalms (e.g., Pss 9:18; 10:14; 12:5; 34:6; 35:10; 74:19), to deserve careful consideration. And on reflection, they are not so strange. As God is specially concerned about the poor, so the poor may be specially concerned about God, for two good reasons. First, if there was poverty in Israel, it was because those with power were misusing it; therefore, the poor would claim God’s help first because it is his rule that was being flouted, and he must vindicate himself. And second, poverty turns people to God because in those circumstances there is no one else to turn to. In this way “poor” becomes almost a technical term. “The poor” are the humble, and the humble are the godly (Pss 10:17; 14:5-6; 37:11; Zep 3:12-13). Just as being rich can foster self-indulgence, self-confidence, pride, and the despising and oppression of one’s fellow human beings, so being poor should encourage the opposite virtues.<\/p>\n<p>Instead of being an evil to be shunned, poverty thus becomes an ideal to be sought. Following the OT use of “the poor” and “the pious” as almost interchangeable terms, personal property was renounced by many Jews during the period between the testaments. Among them were the sect of the Essenes and the related community that was set up at Qumran near the Dead Sea. The latter actually called themselves “The Poor.” This tradition continued into NT times. Possibly “the poor” at Jerusalem means a definite group within the church there (or even the Jerusalem church as a whole; Rom 15:26; Gal 2:10). Certainly there emerged later a Jewish-Christian sect called the “Ebionites” (from a Hebrew word for “poor”).<\/p>\n<p>The NT teaches clearly, of course, that what really matters is the attitude of the heart. It is quite possible to be poor yet grasping, or rich yet generous. Even so, with the OT background outlined above, the general sense of these words in the Gospels is that rich = bad, poor = good. On the one hand, the Sadducees are rich in worldly wealth and the Pharisees in spiritual pride, and men of property are selfish, foolish, and in grave spiritual peril (Mk 10:23; Lk 12:13-21; 16:19-31). On the other hand, it is devout and simple folk, like Jesus’s own family and friends, who generally represent the poor.<\/p>\n<p>In truth, therefore, the two versions of the first beatitude (Matthew’s and Luke’s) amount to the same thing. Matthew’s has the depth: “Blessed are the poor in spirit” (Mt 5:3). But Luke’s has the breadth. When he says simply “Blessed are you poor” (Lk 6:20), he means those who in their need—in <em>any<\/em> kind of need—turn to the Lord. It was to bring the gospel to such people that Christ came into the world (Mt 11:5; Lk 4:18). Jesus Christ himself embodies the same ideal. As Paul put it, “Though he was very rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, so that by his poverty he could make you rich” (2 Cor 8:9, <span>nlt<\/span>). Our helpless poverty is an evil from which he comes to rescue us; his deliberately chosen poverty is the glorious means by which he does so.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Alms; Riches; Righteousness; Wages; Wealth.<\/p>","summary_ro":"POOR, The Those lacking material wealth. Poverty as a Bad Thing At times the Bible gives a very simple explanation of why people are rich or poor. If a person delights in the law of the Lord, he or she will get wealth and riches. Such people will prosper in everything they do (Pss 1:3; 112:3). With regard to Israel in OT days, these ideas are not quite so naive as they might seem. There was indeed a connection between sin and poverty. Israelite society was built on rules laid down by God, so ...","summary_en":"POOR, The Those lacking material wealth. Poverty as a Bad Thing At times the Bible gives a very simple explanation of why people are rich or poor. If a person delights in the law of the Lord, he or she will get wealth and riches. Such people will prosper in everything they do (Pss 1:3; 112:3). With regard to Israel in OT days, these ideas are not quite so naive as they might seem. There was indeed a connection between sin and poverty. Israelite society was built on rules laid down by God, so ...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":36101,"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":54695,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:5","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:5<\/strong> Jesus’ miracles of compassion inaugurated the Kingdom of God (12:28; see Isa 29:18-19; 35:5-6; 61:1). Jesus expected John to understand that he was fulfilling Old Testament expectations.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:5<\/strong> Jesus’ miracles of compassion inaugurated the Kingdom of God (12:28; see Isa 29:18-19; 35:5-6; 61:1). Jesus expected John to understand that he was fulfilling Old Testament expectations.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:5 Jesus’ miracles of compassion inaugurated the Kingdom of God (12:28; see Isa 29:18-19; 35:5-6; 61:1). Jesus expected John to understand that he was fulfilling Old Testament expectations.","summary_en":"11:5 Jesus’ miracles of compassion inaugurated the Kingdom of God (12:28; see Isa 29:18-19; 35:5-6; 61:1). Jesus expected John to understand that he was fulfilling Old Testament expectations.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82321,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:5","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:5<\/strong> Jesus’ miracles of compassion inaugurated the Kingdom of God (12:28; see Isa 29:18-19; 35:5-6; 61:1). Jesus expected John to understand that he was fulfilling Old Testament expectations.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:5<\/strong> Jesus’ miracles of compassion inaugurated the Kingdom of God (12:28; see Isa 29:18-19; 35:5-6; 61:1). Jesus expected John to understand that he was fulfilling Old Testament expectations.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:5 Jesus’ miracles of compassion inaugurated the Kingdom of God (12:28; see Isa 29:18-19; 35:5-6; 61:1). Jesus expected John to understand that he was fulfilling Old Testament expectations.","summary_en":"11:5 Jesus’ miracles of compassion inaugurated the Kingdom of God (12:28; see Isa 29:18-19; 35:5-6; 61:1). Jesus expected John to understand that he was fulfilling Old Testament expectations.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":109947,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:5","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:5<\/strong> Jesus’ miracles of compassion inaugurated the Kingdom of God (12:28; see Isa 29:18-19; 35:5-6; 61:1). Jesus expected John to understand that he was fulfilling Old Testament expectations.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:5<\/strong> Jesus’ miracles of compassion inaugurated the Kingdom of God (12:28; see Isa 29:18-19; 35:5-6; 61:1). Jesus expected John to understand that he was fulfilling Old Testament expectations.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:5 Jesus’ miracles of compassion inaugurated the Kingdom of God (12:28; see Isa 29:18-19; 35:5-6; 61:1). Jesus expected John to understand that he was fulfilling Old Testament expectations.","summary_en":"11:5 Jesus’ miracles of compassion inaugurated the Kingdom of God (12:28; see Isa 29:18-19; 35:5-6; 61:1). Jesus expected John to understand that he was fulfilling Old Testament expectations.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137573,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:5","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:5<\/strong> Jesus’ miracles of compassion inaugurated the Kingdom of God (12:28; see Isa 29:18-19; 35:5-6; 61:1). Jesus expected John to understand that he was fulfilling Old Testament expectations.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:5<\/strong> Jesus’ miracles of compassion inaugurated the Kingdom of God (12:28; see Isa 29:18-19; 35:5-6; 61:1). Jesus expected John to understand that he was fulfilling Old Testament expectations.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:5 Jesus’ miracles of compassion inaugurated the Kingdom of God (12:28; see Isa 29:18-19; 35:5-6; 61:1). Jesus expected John to understand that he was fulfilling Old Testament expectations.","summary_en":"11:5 Jesus’ miracles of compassion inaugurated the Kingdom of God (12:28; see Isa 29:18-19; 35:5-6; 61:1). Jesus expected John to understand that he was fulfilling Old Testament expectations.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64743,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"What Is Good","title_en":"What Is Good","content_ro":"<h3>What Is Good<\/h3>\n<p>Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relationship with him and in their relationships with each other. As they are motivated by love, their actions will be marked by justice, mercy, and humility. God’s people are not to oppress others, but to do what is just, righteous, and honest toward one another.<\/p>\n<p>Micah 6:8 summarizes what God had already made known in the past to Israel: Humility, faith, and obedience are pleasing to him. God declared this message to Abraham (Gen 15:6; 17:1, 9), to Moses at Sinai (Exod 20–23), through his prophets (e.g., Deut 6:1-8; Hos 6:6), and through Israel’s wise men (Prov 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>It pleases God when his people walk humbly in faith before him, as exemplified by Moses (Num 12:3), Habakkuk (Hab 3:17-19), Daniel (Dan 9:1-19), and Ezra (Ezra 9:5-15). Real spirituality and devotion result in doing good, seeking justice, relieving oppression, defending orphans, and aiding widows (see Exod 22:21-24; 23:2-12; Deut 15:4-11; 24:12-15; Neh 5:1-13; Jer 22:16; Dan 4:27; Amos 5:7-24; Jas 1:27). These acts are marks of God’s own character (Ps 146:9; Matt 11:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:19; 34:6-7; Deut 8:3; 16:19-20; 1 Kgs 3:11; Ezra 7:25; Neh 9:31; Isa 2:9; 5:15; 30:18; 38:15; Dan 9:18; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:12, 15; Mic 6:8; Mal 2:17; 3:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>What Is Good<\/h3>\n<p>Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relationship with him and in their relationships with each other. As they are motivated by love, their actions will be marked by justice, mercy, and humility. God’s people are not to oppress others, but to do what is just, righteous, and honest toward one another.<\/p>\n<p>Micah 6:8 summarizes what God had already made known in the past to Israel: Humility, faith, and obedience are pleasing to him. God declared this message to Abraham (Gen 15:6; 17:1, 9), to Moses at Sinai (Exod 20–23), through his prophets (e.g., Deut 6:1-8; Hos 6:6), and through Israel’s wise men (Prov 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>It pleases God when his people walk humbly in faith before him, as exemplified by Moses (Num 12:3), Habakkuk (Hab 3:17-19), Daniel (Dan 9:1-19), and Ezra (Ezra 9:5-15). Real spirituality and devotion result in doing good, seeking justice, relieving oppression, defending orphans, and aiding widows (see Exod 22:21-24; 23:2-12; Deut 15:4-11; 24:12-15; Neh 5:1-13; Jer 22:16; Dan 4:27; Amos 5:7-24; Jas 1:27). These acts are marks of God’s own character (Ps 146:9; Matt 11:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:19; 34:6-7; Deut 8:3; 16:19-20; 1 Kgs 3:11; Ezra 7:25; Neh 9:31; Isa 2:9; 5:15; 30:18; 38:15; Dan 9:18; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:12, 15; Mic 6:8; Mal 2:17; 3:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"What Is Good Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings. The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relation...","summary_en":"What Is Good Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings. The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relation...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65170,"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":92369,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"What Is Good","title_en":"What Is Good","content_ro":"<h3>What Is Good<\/h3>\n<p>Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relationship with him and in their relationships with each other. As they are motivated by love, their actions will be marked by justice, mercy, and humility. God’s people are not to oppress others, but to do what is just, righteous, and honest toward one another.<\/p>\n<p>Micah 6:8 summarizes what God had already made known in the past to Israel: Humility, faith, and obedience are pleasing to him. God declared this message to Abraham (Gen 15:6; 17:1, 9), to Moses at Sinai (Exod 20–23), through his prophets (e.g., Deut 6:1-8; Hos 6:6), and through Israel’s wise men (Prov 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>It pleases God when his people walk humbly in faith before him, as exemplified by Moses (Num 12:3), Habakkuk (Hab 3:17-19), Daniel (Dan 9:1-19), and Ezra (Ezra 9:5-15). Real spirituality and devotion result in doing good, seeking justice, relieving oppression, defending orphans, and aiding widows (see Exod 22:21-24; 23:2-12; Deut 15:4-11; 24:12-15; Neh 5:1-13; Jer 22:16; Dan 4:27; Amos 5:7-24; Jas 1:27). These acts are marks of God’s own character (Ps 146:9; Matt 11:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:19; 34:6-7; Deut 8:3; 16:19-20; 1 Kgs 3:11; Ezra 7:25; Neh 9:31; Isa 2:9; 5:15; 30:18; 38:15; Dan 9:18; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:12, 15; Mic 6:8; Mal 2:17; 3:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>What Is Good<\/h3>\n<p>Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relationship with him and in their relationships with each other. As they are motivated by love, their actions will be marked by justice, mercy, and humility. God’s people are not to oppress others, but to do what is just, righteous, and honest toward one another.<\/p>\n<p>Micah 6:8 summarizes what God had already made known in the past to Israel: Humility, faith, and obedience are pleasing to him. God declared this message to Abraham (Gen 15:6; 17:1, 9), to Moses at Sinai (Exod 20–23), through his prophets (e.g., Deut 6:1-8; Hos 6:6), and through Israel’s wise men (Prov 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>It pleases God when his people walk humbly in faith before him, as exemplified by Moses (Num 12:3), Habakkuk (Hab 3:17-19), Daniel (Dan 9:1-19), and Ezra (Ezra 9:5-15). Real spirituality and devotion result in doing good, seeking justice, relieving oppression, defending orphans, and aiding widows (see Exod 22:21-24; 23:2-12; Deut 15:4-11; 24:12-15; Neh 5:1-13; Jer 22:16; Dan 4:27; Amos 5:7-24; Jas 1:27). These acts are marks of God’s own character (Ps 146:9; Matt 11:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:19; 34:6-7; Deut 8:3; 16:19-20; 1 Kgs 3:11; Ezra 7:25; Neh 9:31; Isa 2:9; 5:15; 30:18; 38:15; Dan 9:18; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:12, 15; Mic 6:8; Mal 2:17; 3:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"What Is Good Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings. The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relation...","summary_en":"What Is Good Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings. The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relation...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92796,"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":119995,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"What Is Good","title_en":"What Is Good","content_ro":"<h3>What Is Good<\/h3>\n<p>Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relationship with him and in their relationships with each other. As they are motivated by love, their actions will be marked by justice, mercy, and humility. God’s people are not to oppress others, but to do what is just, righteous, and honest toward one another.<\/p>\n<p>Micah 6:8 summarizes what God had already made known in the past to Israel: Humility, faith, and obedience are pleasing to him. God declared this message to Abraham (Gen 15:6; 17:1, 9), to Moses at Sinai (Exod 20–23), through his prophets (e.g., Deut 6:1-8; Hos 6:6), and through Israel’s wise men (Prov 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>It pleases God when his people walk humbly in faith before him, as exemplified by Moses (Num 12:3), Habakkuk (Hab 3:17-19), Daniel (Dan 9:1-19), and Ezra (Ezra 9:5-15). Real spirituality and devotion result in doing good, seeking justice, relieving oppression, defending orphans, and aiding widows (see Exod 22:21-24; 23:2-12; Deut 15:4-11; 24:12-15; Neh 5:1-13; Jer 22:16; Dan 4:27; Amos 5:7-24; Jas 1:27). These acts are marks of God’s own character (Ps 146:9; Matt 11:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:19; 34:6-7; Deut 8:3; 16:19-20; 1 Kgs 3:11; Ezra 7:25; Neh 9:31; Isa 2:9; 5:15; 30:18; 38:15; Dan 9:18; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:12, 15; Mic 6:8; Mal 2:17; 3:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>What Is Good<\/h3>\n<p>Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relationship with him and in their relationships with each other. As they are motivated by love, their actions will be marked by justice, mercy, and humility. God’s people are not to oppress others, but to do what is just, righteous, and honest toward one another.<\/p>\n<p>Micah 6:8 summarizes what God had already made known in the past to Israel: Humility, faith, and obedience are pleasing to him. God declared this message to Abraham (Gen 15:6; 17:1, 9), to Moses at Sinai (Exod 20–23), through his prophets (e.g., Deut 6:1-8; Hos 6:6), and through Israel’s wise men (Prov 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>It pleases God when his people walk humbly in faith before him, as exemplified by Moses (Num 12:3), Habakkuk (Hab 3:17-19), Daniel (Dan 9:1-19), and Ezra (Ezra 9:5-15). Real spirituality and devotion result in doing good, seeking justice, relieving oppression, defending orphans, and aiding widows (see Exod 22:21-24; 23:2-12; Deut 15:4-11; 24:12-15; Neh 5:1-13; Jer 22:16; Dan 4:27; Amos 5:7-24; Jas 1:27). These acts are marks of God’s own character (Ps 146:9; Matt 11:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:19; 34:6-7; Deut 8:3; 16:19-20; 1 Kgs 3:11; Ezra 7:25; Neh 9:31; Isa 2:9; 5:15; 30:18; 38:15; Dan 9:18; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:12, 15; Mic 6:8; Mal 2:17; 3:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"What Is Good Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings. The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relation...","summary_en":"What Is Good Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings. The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relation...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120422,"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":147621,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"What Is Good","title_en":"What Is Good","content_ro":"<h3>What Is Good<\/h3>\n<p>Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relationship with him and in their relationships with each other. As they are motivated by love, their actions will be marked by justice, mercy, and humility. God’s people are not to oppress others, but to do what is just, righteous, and honest toward one another.<\/p>\n<p>Micah 6:8 summarizes what God had already made known in the past to Israel: Humility, faith, and obedience are pleasing to him. God declared this message to Abraham (Gen 15:6; 17:1, 9), to Moses at Sinai (Exod 20–23), through his prophets (e.g., Deut 6:1-8; Hos 6:6), and through Israel’s wise men (Prov 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>It pleases God when his people walk humbly in faith before him, as exemplified by Moses (Num 12:3), Habakkuk (Hab 3:17-19), Daniel (Dan 9:1-19), and Ezra (Ezra 9:5-15). Real spirituality and devotion result in doing good, seeking justice, relieving oppression, defending orphans, and aiding widows (see Exod 22:21-24; 23:2-12; Deut 15:4-11; 24:12-15; Neh 5:1-13; Jer 22:16; Dan 4:27; Amos 5:7-24; Jas 1:27). These acts are marks of God’s own character (Ps 146:9; Matt 11:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:19; 34:6-7; Deut 8:3; 16:19-20; 1 Kgs 3:11; Ezra 7:25; Neh 9:31; Isa 2:9; 5:15; 30:18; 38:15; Dan 9:18; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:12, 15; Mic 6:8; Mal 2:17; 3:15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>What Is Good<\/h3>\n<p>Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings.<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relationship with him and in their relationships with each other. As they are motivated by love, their actions will be marked by justice, mercy, and humility. God’s people are not to oppress others, but to do what is just, righteous, and honest toward one another.<\/p>\n<p>Micah 6:8 summarizes what God had already made known in the past to Israel: Humility, faith, and obedience are pleasing to him. God declared this message to Abraham (Gen 15:6; 17:1, 9), to Moses at Sinai (Exod 20–23), through his prophets (e.g., Deut 6:1-8; Hos 6:6), and through Israel’s wise men (Prov 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>It pleases God when his people walk humbly in faith before him, as exemplified by Moses (Num 12:3), Habakkuk (Hab 3:17-19), Daniel (Dan 9:1-19), and Ezra (Ezra 9:5-15). Real spirituality and devotion result in doing good, seeking justice, relieving oppression, defending orphans, and aiding widows (see Exod 22:21-24; 23:2-12; Deut 15:4-11; 24:12-15; Neh 5:1-13; Jer 22:16; Dan 4:27; Amos 5:7-24; Jas 1:27). These acts are marks of God’s own character (Ps 146:9; Matt 11:5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 33:19; 34:6-7; Deut 8:3; 16:19-20; 1 Kgs 3:11; Ezra 7:25; Neh 9:31; Isa 2:9; 5:15; 30:18; 38:15; Dan 9:18; Hos 6:6; Amos 5:12, 15; Mic 6:8; Mal 2:17; 3:15<\/p>","summary_ro":"What Is Good Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings. The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relation...","summary_en":"What Is Good Micah 6:8, a well-known and oft-memorized verse, answers a series of questions put forth by a confused people who had lost their moral and spiritual bearings. The people of Israel wanted to know what they could do to be acceptable to the Lord. In an oppressive and deceitful society, they had lost their sense of what the Lord regards as good. God gave them a concrete answer: He is not seeking mechanical, ritualistic worship (6:6-7), but that his people do what is right in relation...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148048,"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}],"6":[{"id":14573,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel","title_en":"Gospel","content_ro":"<h3>GOSPEL<\/h3>\n<p>Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon <em>godspell<\/em> denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelMessageofIsaiah\">The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his saving action except in his own nature. Israel’s deliverance is undeserved; she is no more worthy of the divine love now than when she went into captivity. In whatever measure she has paid the just due for her past sins (Is 40:2), she remains a sinful people (42:25; 46:12-13; 48:1). It is only by God’s grace that she is saved (55:1-7). By God’s design, Israel’s salvation depends not upon her own righteousness but upon his (41:10; 45:24; 46:13; 51:5-6). There being no righteousness to reward, the Lord acts to <em>create<\/em> righteousness in Israel (45:8; 61:3, 10-11). Yet as these references indicate, salvation is not accomplished at the expense of justice. The penalty for Israel’s sins is to be paid in full. God’s mercy is not hereby called into question. On the contrary, it is precisely here that his mercy is most poignantly expressed, for the penalty is exacted not from his people but from the Servant appointed to stand in their place (53:4-12). Through the Servant’s work, many shall be justified (53:11). The coming of the Evangelist—the preacher of the good news—is predicted in Isaiah 61. He is called the anointed One (v 1) who proclaims the year of the Lord’s favor (v 2). God will be glorified through his preaching (v 3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelintheNewTestament\">The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In only two places (Gal 3:8; Heb 4:2, 6) does the NT speak of the proclamation of the gospel prior to the Christian era. This is quite remarkable, given (1) the unmistakable presence of the gospel in the OT, (2) the extent of gospel terminology in the NT (in the Greek the noun appears 76 times; and the verb, 54), and (3) the fact that the NT presents Christ as the fulfillment of the OT and draws heavily on the OT to interpret his person and work. Not only is it remarkable; it is very significant. It indicates that the NT usage depends not only upon the <em>character<\/em> of the message (truth about salvation) but also upon <em>historical events.<\/em> Almost without exception, the NT restricts its application of gospel terminology to proclamations made during the time of fulfillment—the age in which the salvation promised in the OT is actually accomplished. The NT is preoccupied, not with promises of salvation, but with news of salvation. According to Mark 1:1-4, the gospel “begins” not in the OT but with John the Baptist, in whose work OT prophecy is fulfilled. In Romans 1:1-5 the gospel is represented as a blessing promised in the OT but not actually given until Jesus comes (see also Acts 13:32-33).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGoodNewsofChristsComing\">The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>The promised birth of John the Baptist is good news (Lk 1:19), not only for his parents (vv 7, 24-25) but for all the people: John is sent to prepare them for Messiah’s coming (vv 14-17, 67-79). John’s own preaching is gospel (3:18) for the same reason. The Messiah would be coming to execute judgment, a process that involves both condemnation and salvation (vv 3-17). John’s message is gospel for sinners in that they are warned of impending doom and urged to repent before the ax falls (vv 7-9); it is gospel for the repentant in that they are promised forgiveness (v 3) and membership in Messiah’s community (v 17). The birth of the Savior himself is announced as good news bringing great joy (2:10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelaccordingtoJesus\">The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Kingdom of God<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was authorized by God and anointed by the Spirit to proclaim the gospel (Mk 1:14; Lk 4:18). At the heart of his preaching stands the announcement “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel” (Mk 1:15). (For further references to this gospel, see Mt 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; 26:13; Mk 8:35; 10:29; 13:10; 14:9; Lk 4:43; 8:1; 16:16.) The message is good news for several reasons: (1) The kingdom is coming. The God whom Jesus proclaims is sovereign over all he has made. Yet paradoxically his rule is incomplete: his will is not done on earth as it is in heaven; wrong, not right, prevails. But these conditions are not final, according to Jesus. With the coming of the kingdom, God’s rule will be completed; wrong will be judged, righteousness established, and his people blessed. (2) The kingdom is <em>now<\/em> being inaugurated. “The time is fulfilled,” declares Jesus (Mk 1:15a). The time appointed for the fulfillment of the OT promises has arrived. (3) The consummation of the kingdom is therefore no longer a distant prospect; the full realization of God’s rule is “at hand” (Mk 1:15b). (4) God is establishing his rule for a saving purpose. This is implied in Jesus’ call to repentance (Mk 1:15c). It is especially clear in the passages to which we now turn.<\/p>\n<h5>The Salvation of the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Invited to read the Scripture in the synagogue at Nazareth, Jesus turns to Isaiah 61: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord” (Lk 4:18-19, <span>rsv<\/span>). Having read the prophecy, Jesus announces its fulfillment in his own ministry (v 21). Included among those whom Jesus has come to free are the physically infirm, such as the blind (v 18) and the leprous (v 27) (cf. the references to healing miracles in vv 23, 33-41; the close connection between evangelizing and healing in Mt 4:23; 9:35; 11:5; Lk 7:21-22; 9:6; and the description in Mt 12:22-29; Lk 13:11-16, of the physically afflicted as captives of Satan now liberated by Jesus). Also included are the materially poor—people like the widow helped by Elijah during the famine (Lk 4:25-26). It is the literally poor and hungry whom Jesus pronounces “blessed” in Luke 6:20-21. Yet it is primarily “spiritual” poverty that is in view. Still applying Isaiah 61, Jesus speaks in Matthew 5:3 of the “poor in spirit.” These are people broken and grieved by misery and poverty, oppression and injustice, suffering and death, national apostasy and personal sin—people who in their extremity turn to God and longingly wait for him to bring forth justice, bestow his mercy, and establish his kingdom. It is to just such people that Jesus brings good news (Mt 5:3-10). God sent him to usher in the kingdom, to rescue the lost, to liberate the enslaved, to cure the afflicted, to bind up hearts that are broken, and to forgive the guilty (Mk 2:5, 10, 17; 10:45; Lk 4:18-21; 7:48-49; 15:1-32; 19:10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gift of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>The coming of the kingdom is not the effect or the reward of human effort but God’s answer to the human predicament—the gift of his favor (Lk 12:32). Correspondingly, the explanation for the salvation of the poor lies nowhere but in God’s own character. As the prodigal himself recognized, he hardly deserved to be his father’s servant, much less his son. Nothing he did, not even his repentance, accounted for the father’s love (15:11-32). In the parable of Matthew 20:1-16, it is owing entirely to the goodness of the employer that the last workers to be hired receive a full day’s wages. The first debtor in the story of Matthew 18:23-35 earned nothing but the right to be sold into slavery; instead, the king canceled his enormous debt. The publican, who had nothing to offer God but a confession of sin and plea for mercy, went home justified (Lk 18:13-14). The same holds true for the more virtuous among the poor, such as the persons described in Matthew 5:7-10. Their virtue is real, not imagined. Yet in keeping God’s commands, they do not put him in their debt; they are simply doing their duty (Lk 17:7-10). Furthermore, even the most merciful need divine mercy (Mt 5:7). For even those most zealous to obey God’s law are unable to fulfill all its requirements (cf. 11:28-30). The first servant in Matthew 18:23-35 owes far more money than someone in such a situation could possibly pay—which serves to magnify the generosity of the king. Grace depends for its exercise upon the inability of its objects (Lk 14:12-14).<\/p>\n<h5>The Call to Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The Israelites are without exception a sinful people, all of them needing the salvation that Jesus brings (Mt 1:21; Lk 1:77). In demonstration of God’s grace, Jesus proclaimed his gospel to the entire nation (Mt 4:23; 9:35; 15:24; Lk 4:43; 9:6; 20:1). From the most respectable to the least, all are summoned to submit to God’s rule, all are invited to come and partake freely of the banquet he has spread (Lk 14:16-24). But the gift of salvation must be received if it is to be experienced (Mk 10:15). And while it is indeed a gift that costs nothing, it is also a priceless treasure for which a wise person will freely sacrifice everything else (Mt 13:44-46), a sacrifice exceeded only by the cost of rejecting the gospel (Mt 11:20-24; Mk 8:34-39; Lk 14:24, 33). “Repent and believe in the gospel,” Jesus commands (Mk 1:15). The self-righteous and the self-sufficient must be jolted out of their false sense of security and humbly recognize their need for God (Lk 6:24-26). Only then will Jesus’ message to the poor be seen as gospel. An announcement of liberation (4:18-19) is good news only to people who are enslaved and know they are. The command applies also to the destitute and the afflicted. Those among them who bemoan their lot must repent of their sins. But something further is needed for the response to be complete: a person cannot believe Jesus’ gospel without a commitment to the <em>Person<\/em> of Christ (Jn 3:16). Even those who are already “poor in spirit,” in the sense defined earlier, are not really “blessed” until they acknowledge the truth of Jesus’ claims (Mt 11:6) and commit themselves to a life of obedience on his terms (7:21-27). This prepares us for the next point.<\/p>\n<h5>Summary<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout Jesus’ earthly ministry, the theme of his gospel remains the dawning of God’s kingdom (Mt 4:23; 24:14; Lk 4:43; 16:16), a message that is preached almost exclusively to Jews (Mt 10:5-6; 15:24). Yet Jesus also provides glimpses into what the gospel was to become once his work on earth was accomplished: (1) In Mark 8:35 and 10:29 Jesus speaks of individuals who needed to make great sacrifices “for my sake and for the gospel.” While distinguished from each other, the person of Jesus and the gospel are here associated in the closest possible way. The time was approaching when the Proclaimer of the gospel would become the Proclaimed. (2) In Mark 13:10 and Matthew 24:14 (and the textually doubtful Mk 16:15) Jesus foretells the preaching of the gospel of the kingdom to the gentile nations. (3) In Mark 14, having interpreted a woman’s action (v 3) as an anointing of his body beforehand for burial (v 8), Jesus declares, “And truly, I say to you, wherever the gospel is preached in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her” (v 9, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 26:13). This statement strongly implies that both the person of Jesus and the event of his death will figure prominently in the message that is to be proclaimed; otherwise, it is strange that the gospel and this particular act should be so solemnly bound together. Thus, here in the text already is an indication of how crucial Jesus’ death is both for the provision of the salvation announced in his gospel (cf. Mk 14:22-24) and for the launching of the evangelistic mission to the Gentiles (Mt 20:28 is vital for explaining the shift from Mt 15:24 to 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelafterJesusResurrection\">The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p>After the resurrection of Jesus, the gospel was proclaimed by his eyewitnesses. The contents of this gospel are recorded in the book of Acts and in Paul’s letters. Of the 43 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelizomai<\/span> (“evangelize”) beyond the Gospels, 15 occur in Acts and 21 in Paul’s writings; of the 64 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelion<\/span> (“gospel”), 2 occur in Acts and no fewer than 60 in Paul.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Having risen from the dead, Jesus Christ again evangelizes (Eph 2:16-17), doing so now through his appointed representatives (Rom 15:16-18; 1 Cor 1:17; 9:12-18; Gal 4:13-14; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:9-11). More than that, Christ has become the central theme of the gospel; the Proclaimer is now the Proclaimed. This is repeatedly affirmed in Acts (5:42; 8:4-5, 35; 11:20; 17:18) and in Paul’s writings (Rom 1:1-4; 10:8-17; 15:19-20; 2 Cor 4:4-6; 11:4; Gal 1:16; Eph 3:8; Phil 1:15-18; 2 Tm 2:8). The NT always speaks of <em>the gospel<\/em>—never the gospels—of Christ. A second gospel is as inconceivable and as unnecessary as a second Christ. This is the one gospel that God authorizes (e.g., Rom 1:1-17) and proclaims (e.g., 2 Thes 2:13-14). Galatians 2:7-9 speaks not of two gospels but of two mission fields. Paul (the apostle to the uncircumcised) and Peter (the apostle to the circumcised) are both entrusted with “the gospel of Christ” (Gal 1:7; cf. 1 Cor 15:1-11), the message that God has ordained for the salvation of Jews and Gentiles alike (Rom 1:16). The “different gospel” that Paul denounces in Galatians 1:6-9 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is not another gospel about Jesus but a message about “another Jesus”—not the real one, but one who exists only in the minds and the messages of those who proclaim him. To preach the true Christ is to preach the true gospel, however questionable one’s motives (Phil 1:15-18, 27), and to respond rightly to the gospel is to turn to Christ (Acts 11:20-21; Rom 10:8-17; Gal 2:14-16).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Witness to Saving Events<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel bears witness to every aspect of Christ’s saving work, from his birth (Rom 1:3; 2 Tm 2:8) and public ministry (Mk 1:1; Acts 10:36-38) to his second coming (Col 1:5, 23; cf. 3:1-4; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and the last judgment (Rom 2:16). But it is the death and the resurrection of Christ that are most crucial for the accomplishment of salvation, and that are therefore most prominent in the gospel’s witness. These are the events with which Mark’s proclamation climaxes (chs 15–16), and for which everything else prepares (8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34; 12:6-8); special stress is placed upon Jesus’ death as the means of salvation from sin (10:45; 14:3-9, 22-24). In Paul’s gospel, too, the death and resurrection of Jesus are central (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:1-4), with the cross occupying the very center (1 Cor 1:17–2:5). Had Christ not risen from the dead, Paul argues, the preaching of the cross would be a waste of time (1 Cor 15:14, 17; cf. Rom 6:3-11). However, now that Christ has risen, his death deserves special emphasis as the place where God provides atonement for sins (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 2 Cor 5:14-21; Eph 1:7). The gospel according to Acts proclaims Jesus’ death (Acts 8:25; 20:24, 28; cf. 10:36-43) and preeminently his resurrection, the event by which he conquered death and was exalted as Lord and coming Judge (10:36-43; 13:32-33; 17:18, 31). According to 1 Peter, the bearers of the gospel (1 Pt 1:12) concentrated, as had the OT prophets, on “the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glory” (1:11; cf. 1:18-19; 2:21-24; 3:18-22).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Power for Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel is much more than a report of past events and an exposition of doctrine. Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 1:17-18 and again in Romans 1:16 that the gospel is “the power of God”—not merely a witness to his power but an <em>expression<\/em> of his power. Thus, it cannot be fettered (2 Tm 2:8-9). “Our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power,” Paul writes in 1 Thessalonians 1:5. His point is not that the gospel was accompanied by mighty works (though this happened; cf. Rom 15:18-19), but that the gospel itself is a mighty work. God makes it so through his Holy Spirit (Rom 15:18-19; 1 Cor 2:1-5; 1 Thes 1:6). Furthermore, God’s singular purpose in exercising his power is to change people’s lives, to liberate them from sin and death, and to reconcile them to himself—in short, to save them. The gospel has power to effect the salvation it announces and to impart the life it promises (e.g., Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-18; 15:1-2; Eph 1:13; 2 Thes 2:13-14; 2 Tm 1:8-11; 1 Pt 1:23-25). If people are to experience salvation, they must hear and believe the gospel. It is precisely in and through this message that the saving power manifested in the person and work of Christ (especially in his death and resurrection) is conveyed to men and made effective in their lives. Similarly it is in association with the gospel, or as a direct result of the reception of the gospel, that the Holy Spirit is imparted to believers (Acts 10:36-44; 15:7-8; 2 Cor 11:4; Gal 3:1-2). In short, the gospel is the decisive place of encounter between the sinner and God the Savior.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>According to Peter’s testimony at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:7-11), an essential part of the gospel—for Gentiles and Jews alike—is salvation “through the grace of the Lord Jesus.” Toward the close of his missionary career, Paul states that his basic concern has been “to testify to the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24, <span>rsv<\/span>). This statement can be understood only in relation to Paul’s concept of the righteousness of God, particularly as set forth in Romans. Paul is here not merely expounding a divine attribute. Rather, he is dramatizing a divine activity—the manifestation of God’s righteousness now, “in the present time” (Rom 3:26), in the new age inaugurated by the coming of Jesus. The manifestation is twofold. Viewing the two aspects together, and doing so in the light of the gospel declared by Isaiah and by Jesus (both of whom strongly influenced Paul), respectively, will help us to understand why Paul speaks of “the gospel of the grace of God.”<\/p>\n<p>First, the gospel is a <em>witness<\/em> to God’s grace. In offering his Son as a sacrifice for sins (Rom 3:25a), God demonstrates his righteousness (vv 25b-26). That is, in the death of Jesus sins formerly “passed over” (v 25c) become the object of God’s wrath (cf. 1:18) and judgment. Yet in the very place where God deals justly and decisively with sins, he shows his grace to sinners. For the judgment against sin is focused not upon the sinners themselves but upon the One appointed to act on their behalf and to stand in their place (Rom 4:25; 5:6, 11; cf. 2 Cor 5:21; Gal 3:13). On this basis, sinners are freely pardoned (Rom 3:24). “The grace of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 15:11) toward the sinful is also in evidence, for he willingly bears their iniquities and suffers the consequences of their wrongdoing (Gal 2:20; cf. 2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the gospel is a <em>channel<\/em> of God’s grace. “The righteousness of God is revealed” in the gospel, says Paul (Rom 1:17). By this he means, not that the gospel talks about the righteousness of God (though it does), but that God’s righteousness is actively at work in the gospel. This activity in turn explains how the gospel becomes “the power of God for salvation” (v 16). And just how does God demonstrate his righteousness at this stage? In short, by bestowing it as a free gift on sinful human beings. It remains the righteousness of God, but by God’s grace, it is a righteousness in which humans may share. Furthermore, partaking of God’s righteousness depends on being personally united with Jesus Christ. In Paul’s view the saved person is one who has been acquitted, justified, “declared righteous” by God the judge. The basis for the verdict is not that I in myself am righteous (God justifies the ungodly, Rom 4:5). Nor does God treat me as though I were righteous. According to Paul I am declared righteous because I really <em>am<\/em> righteous—not in myself but in Christ (1 Cor 1:30; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9). This union is established through the revelation—and the free offer—of God’s righteousness in the gospel (Rom 1:16-17).<\/p>\n<h5>Responding to the Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel calls for a threefold response:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>Believing.<\/em> The gospel, says Paul, is “the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith” (Rom 1:16). For Paul, faith is the abandonment of all reliance upon “works of law” for justification (3:28) and utter dependence upon the grace of God as demonstrated in the work of Christ, especially his death (v 25). Accordingly, the “different gospel” of Galatians 1:6 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is spurious, for it preaches salvation by personal merit rather than (or together with) the work of Christ (cf. Gal 2:16). Ultimately faith rests upon God (Rom 4:24; 1 Thes 1:8-9) and upon Christ (Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 2:16, 20). Yet it is imperative that one believe the gospel also (Acts 8:12; 11:20-21; 15:7; Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-24; Phil 1:27; Heb 4:2), for it is just by this means that God’s salvation is made known and mediated. Moreover, believing the gospel entails repentance (Acts 14:15; 20:21, 24; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and obedience (Rom 1:5; 15:16-18; Heb 4:6). Those who refuse to obey the gospel are imperiling their lives (2 Thes 1:5-10; 1 Pt 4:17).<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Growing.<\/em> The Gospel is more than a message to be received—it is also a place in which to stand (1 Cor 15:1-2). It is sustainer of life as well as giver of life. One grows as a Christian not by turning from the gospel to other things (to turn away from the gospel is to abandon God and Christ, Gal 1:6), but by going ever more deeply into the gospel. In Romans 1:15 Paul expresses his eagerness to proclaim the gospel to the Christians in Rome. In the following chapters, anticipating his visit, he offers one of his most profound expositions of the gospel—one whose truth has never been fathomed and whose power has never been exhausted.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Hoping.<\/em> “The hope of the gospel” (Col 1:23) includes not only the return of Christ and the glory of heaven (Col 1:5; 3:1-4; 2 Thes 2:14-16) but the final judgment as well. For those who embrace the gospel, the last judgment holds no terrors, because the Judge is the very one who rescues them from the wrath to come (1 Thes 1:10). Those who are united to him need not dread condemnation now or at the end (Rom 8:1). Instead, the last judgment will mark their final vindication (1 Cor 4:5; Gal 5:5). Accordingly, this theme is not just a corollary but an integral part of the Good News (Rom 2:16). Those who have died since believing the gospel (1 Pt 4:6) may seem to have suffered a fate common to all people, or even the condemnation reserved for the lawless; in fact, their response to the gospel assures them of approval by the coming Lord (4:5-6; 5:4) and of a share in the imperishable inheritance of heaven (1:4).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GOSPEL<\/h3>\n<p>Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon <em>godspell<\/em> denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelMessageofIsaiah\">The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his saving action except in his own nature. Israel’s deliverance is undeserved; she is no more worthy of the divine love now than when she went into captivity. In whatever measure she has paid the just due for her past sins (Is 40:2), she remains a sinful people (42:25; 46:12-13; 48:1). It is only by God’s grace that she is saved (55:1-7). By God’s design, Israel’s salvation depends not upon her own righteousness but upon his (41:10; 45:24; 46:13; 51:5-6). There being no righteousness to reward, the Lord acts to <em>create<\/em> righteousness in Israel (45:8; 61:3, 10-11). Yet as these references indicate, salvation is not accomplished at the expense of justice. The penalty for Israel’s sins is to be paid in full. God’s mercy is not hereby called into question. On the contrary, it is precisely here that his mercy is most poignantly expressed, for the penalty is exacted not from his people but from the Servant appointed to stand in their place (53:4-12). Through the Servant’s work, many shall be justified (53:11). The coming of the Evangelist—the preacher of the good news—is predicted in Isaiah 61. He is called the anointed One (v 1) who proclaims the year of the Lord’s favor (v 2). God will be glorified through his preaching (v 3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelintheNewTestament\">The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In only two places (Gal 3:8; Heb 4:2, 6) does the NT speak of the proclamation of the gospel prior to the Christian era. This is quite remarkable, given (1) the unmistakable presence of the gospel in the OT, (2) the extent of gospel terminology in the NT (in the Greek the noun appears 76 times; and the verb, 54), and (3) the fact that the NT presents Christ as the fulfillment of the OT and draws heavily on the OT to interpret his person and work. Not only is it remarkable; it is very significant. It indicates that the NT usage depends not only upon the <em>character<\/em> of the message (truth about salvation) but also upon <em>historical events.<\/em> Almost without exception, the NT restricts its application of gospel terminology to proclamations made during the time of fulfillment—the age in which the salvation promised in the OT is actually accomplished. The NT is preoccupied, not with promises of salvation, but with news of salvation. According to Mark 1:1-4, the gospel “begins” not in the OT but with John the Baptist, in whose work OT prophecy is fulfilled. In Romans 1:1-5 the gospel is represented as a blessing promised in the OT but not actually given until Jesus comes (see also Acts 13:32-33).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGoodNewsofChristsComing\">The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>The promised birth of John the Baptist is good news (Lk 1:19), not only for his parents (vv 7, 24-25) but for all the people: John is sent to prepare them for Messiah’s coming (vv 14-17, 67-79). John’s own preaching is gospel (3:18) for the same reason. The Messiah would be coming to execute judgment, a process that involves both condemnation and salvation (vv 3-17). John’s message is gospel for sinners in that they are warned of impending doom and urged to repent before the ax falls (vv 7-9); it is gospel for the repentant in that they are promised forgiveness (v 3) and membership in Messiah’s community (v 17). The birth of the Savior himself is announced as good news bringing great joy (2:10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelaccordingtoJesus\">The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Kingdom of God<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was authorized by God and anointed by the Spirit to proclaim the gospel (Mk 1:14; Lk 4:18). At the heart of his preaching stands the announcement “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel” (Mk 1:15). (For further references to this gospel, see Mt 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; 26:13; Mk 8:35; 10:29; 13:10; 14:9; Lk 4:43; 8:1; 16:16.) The message is good news for several reasons: (1) The kingdom is coming. The God whom Jesus proclaims is sovereign over all he has made. Yet paradoxically his rule is incomplete: his will is not done on earth as it is in heaven; wrong, not right, prevails. But these conditions are not final, according to Jesus. With the coming of the kingdom, God’s rule will be completed; wrong will be judged, righteousness established, and his people blessed. (2) The kingdom is <em>now<\/em> being inaugurated. “The time is fulfilled,” declares Jesus (Mk 1:15a). The time appointed for the fulfillment of the OT promises has arrived. (3) The consummation of the kingdom is therefore no longer a distant prospect; the full realization of God’s rule is “at hand” (Mk 1:15b). (4) God is establishing his rule for a saving purpose. This is implied in Jesus’ call to repentance (Mk 1:15c). It is especially clear in the passages to which we now turn.<\/p>\n<h5>The Salvation of the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Invited to read the Scripture in the synagogue at Nazareth, Jesus turns to Isaiah 61: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord” (Lk 4:18-19, <span>rsv<\/span>). Having read the prophecy, Jesus announces its fulfillment in his own ministry (v 21). Included among those whom Jesus has come to free are the physically infirm, such as the blind (v 18) and the leprous (v 27) (cf. the references to healing miracles in vv 23, 33-41; the close connection between evangelizing and healing in Mt 4:23; 9:35; 11:5; Lk 7:21-22; 9:6; and the description in Mt 12:22-29; Lk 13:11-16, of the physically afflicted as captives of Satan now liberated by Jesus). Also included are the materially poor—people like the widow helped by Elijah during the famine (Lk 4:25-26). It is the literally poor and hungry whom Jesus pronounces “blessed” in Luke 6:20-21. Yet it is primarily “spiritual” poverty that is in view. Still applying Isaiah 61, Jesus speaks in Matthew 5:3 of the “poor in spirit.” These are people broken and grieved by misery and poverty, oppression and injustice, suffering and death, national apostasy and personal sin—people who in their extremity turn to God and longingly wait for him to bring forth justice, bestow his mercy, and establish his kingdom. It is to just such people that Jesus brings good news (Mt 5:3-10). God sent him to usher in the kingdom, to rescue the lost, to liberate the enslaved, to cure the afflicted, to bind up hearts that are broken, and to forgive the guilty (Mk 2:5, 10, 17; 10:45; Lk 4:18-21; 7:48-49; 15:1-32; 19:10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gift of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>The coming of the kingdom is not the effect or the reward of human effort but God’s answer to the human predicament—the gift of his favor (Lk 12:32). Correspondingly, the explanation for the salvation of the poor lies nowhere but in God’s own character. As the prodigal himself recognized, he hardly deserved to be his father’s servant, much less his son. Nothing he did, not even his repentance, accounted for the father’s love (15:11-32). In the parable of Matthew 20:1-16, it is owing entirely to the goodness of the employer that the last workers to be hired receive a full day’s wages. The first debtor in the story of Matthew 18:23-35 earned nothing but the right to be sold into slavery; instead, the king canceled his enormous debt. The publican, who had nothing to offer God but a confession of sin and plea for mercy, went home justified (Lk 18:13-14). The same holds true for the more virtuous among the poor, such as the persons described in Matthew 5:7-10. Their virtue is real, not imagined. Yet in keeping God’s commands, they do not put him in their debt; they are simply doing their duty (Lk 17:7-10). Furthermore, even the most merciful need divine mercy (Mt 5:7). For even those most zealous to obey God’s law are unable to fulfill all its requirements (cf. 11:28-30). The first servant in Matthew 18:23-35 owes far more money than someone in such a situation could possibly pay—which serves to magnify the generosity of the king. Grace depends for its exercise upon the inability of its objects (Lk 14:12-14).<\/p>\n<h5>The Call to Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The Israelites are without exception a sinful people, all of them needing the salvation that Jesus brings (Mt 1:21; Lk 1:77). In demonstration of God’s grace, Jesus proclaimed his gospel to the entire nation (Mt 4:23; 9:35; 15:24; Lk 4:43; 9:6; 20:1). From the most respectable to the least, all are summoned to submit to God’s rule, all are invited to come and partake freely of the banquet he has spread (Lk 14:16-24). But the gift of salvation must be received if it is to be experienced (Mk 10:15). And while it is indeed a gift that costs nothing, it is also a priceless treasure for which a wise person will freely sacrifice everything else (Mt 13:44-46), a sacrifice exceeded only by the cost of rejecting the gospel (Mt 11:20-24; Mk 8:34-39; Lk 14:24, 33). “Repent and believe in the gospel,” Jesus commands (Mk 1:15). The self-righteous and the self-sufficient must be jolted out of their false sense of security and humbly recognize their need for God (Lk 6:24-26). Only then will Jesus’ message to the poor be seen as gospel. An announcement of liberation (4:18-19) is good news only to people who are enslaved and know they are. The command applies also to the destitute and the afflicted. Those among them who bemoan their lot must repent of their sins. But something further is needed for the response to be complete: a person cannot believe Jesus’ gospel without a commitment to the <em>Person<\/em> of Christ (Jn 3:16). Even those who are already “poor in spirit,” in the sense defined earlier, are not really “blessed” until they acknowledge the truth of Jesus’ claims (Mt 11:6) and commit themselves to a life of obedience on his terms (7:21-27). This prepares us for the next point.<\/p>\n<h5>Summary<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout Jesus’ earthly ministry, the theme of his gospel remains the dawning of God’s kingdom (Mt 4:23; 24:14; Lk 4:43; 16:16), a message that is preached almost exclusively to Jews (Mt 10:5-6; 15:24). Yet Jesus also provides glimpses into what the gospel was to become once his work on earth was accomplished: (1) In Mark 8:35 and 10:29 Jesus speaks of individuals who needed to make great sacrifices “for my sake and for the gospel.” While distinguished from each other, the person of Jesus and the gospel are here associated in the closest possible way. The time was approaching when the Proclaimer of the gospel would become the Proclaimed. (2) In Mark 13:10 and Matthew 24:14 (and the textually doubtful Mk 16:15) Jesus foretells the preaching of the gospel of the kingdom to the gentile nations. (3) In Mark 14, having interpreted a woman’s action (v 3) as an anointing of his body beforehand for burial (v 8), Jesus declares, “And truly, I say to you, wherever the gospel is preached in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her” (v 9, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 26:13). This statement strongly implies that both the person of Jesus and the event of his death will figure prominently in the message that is to be proclaimed; otherwise, it is strange that the gospel and this particular act should be so solemnly bound together. Thus, here in the text already is an indication of how crucial Jesus’ death is both for the provision of the salvation announced in his gospel (cf. Mk 14:22-24) and for the launching of the evangelistic mission to the Gentiles (Mt 20:28 is vital for explaining the shift from Mt 15:24 to 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelafterJesusResurrection\">The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p>After the resurrection of Jesus, the gospel was proclaimed by his eyewitnesses. The contents of this gospel are recorded in the book of Acts and in Paul’s letters. Of the 43 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelizomai<\/span> (“evangelize”) beyond the Gospels, 15 occur in Acts and 21 in Paul’s writings; of the 64 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelion<\/span> (“gospel”), 2 occur in Acts and no fewer than 60 in Paul.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Having risen from the dead, Jesus Christ again evangelizes (Eph 2:16-17), doing so now through his appointed representatives (Rom 15:16-18; 1 Cor 1:17; 9:12-18; Gal 4:13-14; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:9-11). More than that, Christ has become the central theme of the gospel; the Proclaimer is now the Proclaimed. This is repeatedly affirmed in Acts (5:42; 8:4-5, 35; 11:20; 17:18) and in Paul’s writings (Rom 1:1-4; 10:8-17; 15:19-20; 2 Cor 4:4-6; 11:4; Gal 1:16; Eph 3:8; Phil 1:15-18; 2 Tm 2:8). The NT always speaks of <em>the gospel<\/em>—never the gospels—of Christ. A second gospel is as inconceivable and as unnecessary as a second Christ. This is the one gospel that God authorizes (e.g., Rom 1:1-17) and proclaims (e.g., 2 Thes 2:13-14). Galatians 2:7-9 speaks not of two gospels but of two mission fields. Paul (the apostle to the uncircumcised) and Peter (the apostle to the circumcised) are both entrusted with “the gospel of Christ” (Gal 1:7; cf. 1 Cor 15:1-11), the message that God has ordained for the salvation of Jews and Gentiles alike (Rom 1:16). The “different gospel” that Paul denounces in Galatians 1:6-9 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is not another gospel about Jesus but a message about “another Jesus”—not the real one, but one who exists only in the minds and the messages of those who proclaim him. To preach the true Christ is to preach the true gospel, however questionable one’s motives (Phil 1:15-18, 27), and to respond rightly to the gospel is to turn to Christ (Acts 11:20-21; Rom 10:8-17; Gal 2:14-16).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Witness to Saving Events<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel bears witness to every aspect of Christ’s saving work, from his birth (Rom 1:3; 2 Tm 2:8) and public ministry (Mk 1:1; Acts 10:36-38) to his second coming (Col 1:5, 23; cf. 3:1-4; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and the last judgment (Rom 2:16). But it is the death and the resurrection of Christ that are most crucial for the accomplishment of salvation, and that are therefore most prominent in the gospel’s witness. These are the events with which Mark’s proclamation climaxes (chs 15–16), and for which everything else prepares (8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34; 12:6-8); special stress is placed upon Jesus’ death as the means of salvation from sin (10:45; 14:3-9, 22-24). In Paul’s gospel, too, the death and resurrection of Jesus are central (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:1-4), with the cross occupying the very center (1 Cor 1:17–2:5). Had Christ not risen from the dead, Paul argues, the preaching of the cross would be a waste of time (1 Cor 15:14, 17; cf. Rom 6:3-11). However, now that Christ has risen, his death deserves special emphasis as the place where God provides atonement for sins (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 2 Cor 5:14-21; Eph 1:7). The gospel according to Acts proclaims Jesus’ death (Acts 8:25; 20:24, 28; cf. 10:36-43) and preeminently his resurrection, the event by which he conquered death and was exalted as Lord and coming Judge (10:36-43; 13:32-33; 17:18, 31). According to 1 Peter, the bearers of the gospel (1 Pt 1:12) concentrated, as had the OT prophets, on “the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glory” (1:11; cf. 1:18-19; 2:21-24; 3:18-22).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Power for Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel is much more than a report of past events and an exposition of doctrine. Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 1:17-18 and again in Romans 1:16 that the gospel is “the power of God”—not merely a witness to his power but an <em>expression<\/em> of his power. Thus, it cannot be fettered (2 Tm 2:8-9). “Our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power,” Paul writes in 1 Thessalonians 1:5. His point is not that the gospel was accompanied by mighty works (though this happened; cf. Rom 15:18-19), but that the gospel itself is a mighty work. God makes it so through his Holy Spirit (Rom 15:18-19; 1 Cor 2:1-5; 1 Thes 1:6). Furthermore, God’s singular purpose in exercising his power is to change people’s lives, to liberate them from sin and death, and to reconcile them to himself—in short, to save them. The gospel has power to effect the salvation it announces and to impart the life it promises (e.g., Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-18; 15:1-2; Eph 1:13; 2 Thes 2:13-14; 2 Tm 1:8-11; 1 Pt 1:23-25). If people are to experience salvation, they must hear and believe the gospel. It is precisely in and through this message that the saving power manifested in the person and work of Christ (especially in his death and resurrection) is conveyed to men and made effective in their lives. Similarly it is in association with the gospel, or as a direct result of the reception of the gospel, that the Holy Spirit is imparted to believers (Acts 10:36-44; 15:7-8; 2 Cor 11:4; Gal 3:1-2). In short, the gospel is the decisive place of encounter between the sinner and God the Savior.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>According to Peter’s testimony at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:7-11), an essential part of the gospel—for Gentiles and Jews alike—is salvation “through the grace of the Lord Jesus.” Toward the close of his missionary career, Paul states that his basic concern has been “to testify to the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24, <span>rsv<\/span>). This statement can be understood only in relation to Paul’s concept of the righteousness of God, particularly as set forth in Romans. Paul is here not merely expounding a divine attribute. Rather, he is dramatizing a divine activity—the manifestation of God’s righteousness now, “in the present time” (Rom 3:26), in the new age inaugurated by the coming of Jesus. The manifestation is twofold. Viewing the two aspects together, and doing so in the light of the gospel declared by Isaiah and by Jesus (both of whom strongly influenced Paul), respectively, will help us to understand why Paul speaks of “the gospel of the grace of God.”<\/p>\n<p>First, the gospel is a <em>witness<\/em> to God’s grace. In offering his Son as a sacrifice for sins (Rom 3:25a), God demonstrates his righteousness (vv 25b-26). That is, in the death of Jesus sins formerly “passed over” (v 25c) become the object of God’s wrath (cf. 1:18) and judgment. Yet in the very place where God deals justly and decisively with sins, he shows his grace to sinners. For the judgment against sin is focused not upon the sinners themselves but upon the One appointed to act on their behalf and to stand in their place (Rom 4:25; 5:6, 11; cf. 2 Cor 5:21; Gal 3:13). On this basis, sinners are freely pardoned (Rom 3:24). “The grace of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 15:11) toward the sinful is also in evidence, for he willingly bears their iniquities and suffers the consequences of their wrongdoing (Gal 2:20; cf. 2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the gospel is a <em>channel<\/em> of God’s grace. “The righteousness of God is revealed” in the gospel, says Paul (Rom 1:17). By this he means, not that the gospel talks about the righteousness of God (though it does), but that God’s righteousness is actively at work in the gospel. This activity in turn explains how the gospel becomes “the power of God for salvation” (v 16). And just how does God demonstrate his righteousness at this stage? In short, by bestowing it as a free gift on sinful human beings. It remains the righteousness of God, but by God’s grace, it is a righteousness in which humans may share. Furthermore, partaking of God’s righteousness depends on being personally united with Jesus Christ. In Paul’s view the saved person is one who has been acquitted, justified, “declared righteous” by God the judge. The basis for the verdict is not that I in myself am righteous (God justifies the ungodly, Rom 4:5). Nor does God treat me as though I were righteous. According to Paul I am declared righteous because I really <em>am<\/em> righteous—not in myself but in Christ (1 Cor 1:30; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9). This union is established through the revelation—and the free offer—of God’s righteousness in the gospel (Rom 1:16-17).<\/p>\n<h5>Responding to the Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel calls for a threefold response:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>Believing.<\/em> The gospel, says Paul, is “the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith” (Rom 1:16). For Paul, faith is the abandonment of all reliance upon “works of law” for justification (3:28) and utter dependence upon the grace of God as demonstrated in the work of Christ, especially his death (v 25). Accordingly, the “different gospel” of Galatians 1:6 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is spurious, for it preaches salvation by personal merit rather than (or together with) the work of Christ (cf. Gal 2:16). Ultimately faith rests upon God (Rom 4:24; 1 Thes 1:8-9) and upon Christ (Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 2:16, 20). Yet it is imperative that one believe the gospel also (Acts 8:12; 11:20-21; 15:7; Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-24; Phil 1:27; Heb 4:2), for it is just by this means that God’s salvation is made known and mediated. Moreover, believing the gospel entails repentance (Acts 14:15; 20:21, 24; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and obedience (Rom 1:5; 15:16-18; Heb 4:6). Those who refuse to obey the gospel are imperiling their lives (2 Thes 1:5-10; 1 Pt 4:17).<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Growing.<\/em> The Gospel is more than a message to be received—it is also a place in which to stand (1 Cor 15:1-2). It is sustainer of life as well as giver of life. One grows as a Christian not by turning from the gospel to other things (to turn away from the gospel is to abandon God and Christ, Gal 1:6), but by going ever more deeply into the gospel. In Romans 1:15 Paul expresses his eagerness to proclaim the gospel to the Christians in Rome. In the following chapters, anticipating his visit, he offers one of his most profound expositions of the gospel—one whose truth has never been fathomed and whose power has never been exhausted.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Hoping.<\/em> “The hope of the gospel” (Col 1:23) includes not only the return of Christ and the glory of heaven (Col 1:5; 3:1-4; 2 Thes 2:14-16) but the final judgment as well. For those who embrace the gospel, the last judgment holds no terrors, because the Judge is the very one who rescues them from the wrath to come (1 Thes 1:10). Those who are united to him need not dread condemnation now or at the end (Rom 8:1). Instead, the last judgment will mark their final vindication (1 Cor 4:5; Gal 5:5). Accordingly, this theme is not just a corollary but an integral part of the Good News (Rom 2:16). Those who have died since believing the gospel (1 Pt 4:6) may seem to have suffered a fate common to all people, or even the condemnation reserved for the lawless; in fact, their response to the gospel assures them of approval by the coming Lord (4:5-6; 5:4) and of a share in the imperishable inheritance of heaven (1:4).<\/p>","summary_ro":"GOSPEL Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon godspell denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.” Preview • The Gospel Message of Isaiah • The Gospel in the New Testament • The Good News of Christ’s Coming • The Gospel according to Jesus • The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection The Gospel Message of Isaiah Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his...","summary_en":"GOSPEL Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon godspell denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.” Preview • The Gospel Message of Isaiah • The Gospel in the New Testament • The Good News of Christ’s Coming • The Gospel according to Jesus • The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection The Gospel Message of Isaiah Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21894,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Kingdom of Heaven Kingdom of God","title_en":"Kingdom of Heaven Kingdom of God","content_ro":"<h3>KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>• In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughout Galilee teaching in the synagogues, preaching everywhere the Good News about the Kingdom” (Mt 4:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Sermon on the Mount is concerned with the righteousness that qualifies people to enter the kingdom of God (5:20). The collection of parables in Matthew 13 and Mark 4 illustrate the “mystery” of the kingdom of God (Mt 13:11; Mk 4:11). The establishment of the Lord’s Supper looks forward to the establishment of the kingdom of God (Mt 26:29; Mk 14:25).<\/p>\n<p>The NT reports two different forms of the expression: “the kingdom of God” and “the kingdom of the heavens.” The latter is found only in Matthew, but Matthew also has “the kingdom of God” four times (Mt 12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43). “The kingdom of heaven” is a Semitic phrase that would have been meaningful to Jews but not to Greeks. The Jews, out of reverence for God, avoided uttering the divine name, and contemporary literature gives examples of substituting the word “heaven” for God (1 Macc 3:18, 50; 4:10; see Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>The key to an understanding of the kingdom of God is that the basic meaning of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span><em>,<\/em> as also of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>,<\/em> is rule, reign, dominion. We frequently find in the OT the expression “in the year of the kingdom of . . . ,” meaning in the year of the reign of a given king (e.g., 1 Chr 26:31; 2 Chr 3:2; 15:10; Ezr 7:1; 8:1; Est 2:16; Jer 10:7; 52:31). When we read that Solomon’s kingdom was firmly established (1 Kgs 2:12), we are to understand that his authority to reign was settled. To “turn the kingdom of Saul over to [David]” (1 Chr 12:23, <span>kjv<\/span>) indicates that the authority that had been Saul’s was given to David. As a result of having received legal authority, David became king. This abstract idea of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is evident when it is found in parallelisms with such ideas as power, might, glory, and dominion (Dn 4:34; 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>When <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is used of God, it almost always refers to his authority or to his rule as the heavenly King. “They will talk together about the glory of your kingdom; they will celebrate examples of your power. . . . For your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. You rule generation after generation” (Ps 145:11, 13, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Further, if a king rules, there must be a realm or sphere over which he reigns. This is also called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>.<\/em> “So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet, for his God gave him rest round about” (2 Chr 20:30, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Est 3:6; Jer 10:7; Dn 9:1; 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>This same twofold use of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> is found in the NT. In fact, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> could be translated by the expression “kingly power” in Luke 23:42 (<span>niv<\/span> mg) and by “kingship” in John 18:36. When a nobleman went into a far country to get a “kingdom” (Luke 19:12, <span>nasb<\/span>) he went to the governing authority to get an appointment as king. When Jesus said, “My kingship is not of this world” (Jn 18:36, <span>rsv<\/span>), he did not mean to say that his rule has nothing to do with the world but rather that his kingship—his dominion—does not come from man but from God. Therefore, he rejects the use of worldly fighting to gain his ends.<\/p>\n<p>This central meaning of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> makes it easy to understand many sayings in the Gospels. In the Lord’s Prayer the petition “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10) is a prayer for God to manifest his reign so that his will may be done on earth as it is in heaven. When we read that we are to “receive the kingdom of God like a child” (Mk 10:15, <span>rsv<\/span>), we must open our hearts and lives to the rule of God.<\/p>\n<p>Also in the NT are sayings about being <em>in<\/em> the kingdom or of <em>entering<\/em> the kingdom (Mt 8:11; Mk 9:47; 10:23-25; Lk 13:28). There is no philological or theological objection to understanding “the kingdom of God” first as the divine reign or rule and second as the sphere of blessing in which that reign is experienced.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentBackground\">Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>The expression “the kingdom of God” is not found in the OT, but the idea appears throughout the prophets. God is frequently spoken of as the King, both of Israel (Ex 15:18; Nm 23:21; Dt 33:5; Is 43:15) and of all the earth (2 Kgs 19:15; Pss 29:10; 47:2; 93:1-2; 96:10; 97:1-9; 99:1-4; 145:11-13; Is 6:5; Jer 46:18). Although God is not the earthly King of Israel, other references speak of a day when God shall become King and shall rule over his people (Is 24:23; 33:22; 52:7; Ob 1:21; Zep 3:15; Zec 14:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>This brief summary of God’s kingship provides the outline for the entire OT concept. While God is King over all the earth, he is in a special way King over his people, Israel. God’s rule is therefore something realized in Israel’s history. However, it is only partially and imperfectly realized. Israel again and again rebelled against the divine sovereignty. Furthermore, Israel was constantly plagued by wars with its pagan neighbors in which it was not always victorious. Again, there are evils in nature and the physical world that often bring suffering to God’s people. Therefore, the prophets look forward to a day when God’s rule will be fully experienced, not by Israel alone, but by all the world. The main emphasis of the prophets is on hope, the establishing of God’s perfect rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets describe the final establishment of God’s kingdom in terms of a theophany—a divine visitation (Mi 1:3-4). Zechariah foresees a “Day of the Lord” when all nations will be gathered in battle against Jerusalem, when the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations (Zec 14:3, 5). Israel will be visited by the Lord (Is 29:6) and delivered from its enemies (35:4; 59:20). God’s coming will also mean judgment (2:21; 26:21). This final coming of God will mean the salvation of the Gentiles as well as of Israel (Zec 2:10-11; cf. Is 66:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>Behind this language is a distinct theology of “the God who comes.” It is a fact widely recognized in contemporary OT theology that the God of the OT is not a nature god, like the gods of other peoples, but a God of history—a God who visits his people in history to bless or to judge them. God visited Israel in Egypt to deliver them from bondage and to constitute them as his people. The rescue from Egypt was not merely an act of deliverance; it was an act through which God made himself known and through which Israel was to know and serve him.<\/p>\n<p>Because God has visited his people again and again in their history, he must finally come to them in the future to judge wickedness and to establish his kingdom. Israel’s hope is thus rooted in history, or rather in the God who works in history. God will finally break into history in a glorious theophany to establish his rule in all the earth. The source of the kingdom is not history itself but God.<\/p>\n<p>While the prophets visualize the kingdom as coming from God, the kingdom is always on earth. The divine irruption into the natural order is not designed to accomplish its destruction but to make way for a new, perfect order arising out of the old, imperfect one. The prophets do not present a single consistent picture of the new order. Sometimes the new order is described very much in this-worldly terms. “The terraced vineyards on the hills of Israel will drip with sweet wine” (Am 9:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). On the other hand, God will create new heavens and a new earth (Is 65:17; 66:22), where there will be untroubled joy, prosperity, peace, and righteousness. The final visitation of God will mean the redemption of the world, for a redeemed earth is the scene of the kingdom of God. The prophets look forward again and again to the deliverance of creation “from the bondage to decay.” The description is often couched in simple physical terms. The wilderness will become fruitful (32:15); the desert will blossom (35:2); sorrow and sighing will flee away (v 10). The burning sands will be cooled and the dry places become springs of water (v 7); peace will return to the animal world so that all injury and destruction are done away with (11:6). All this results because the earth becomes full of the knowledge of God (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Such language is not mere poetry but reflects a profound theology of creation. Humans as creatures were made to dwell on the earth, and the earth shares in human destiny. The main point is that creation as such is good and not a hindrance to true spirituality, as was often true in Greek thought. Redemption always includes redemption of the earth, which then becomes the blessed environment God intended it to be. Salvation does not mean deliverance from creaturehood, for this is not an evil thing but an essential and permanent element of true, human existence. Salvation does not mean escape from bodily creaturely existence, as in some Greek thought. On the contrary, ultimate redemption will mean the redemption of the whole person. The emergence of the doctrine of bodily resurrection is a reflection of this theology of creaturehood. The corollary of this is that creation in its entirety must share in the blessing of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>A distinctive element in prophetic eschatology is the tension between history and eschatology. That is, as the prophets looked into the future, they saw an immediate historical judgment as well as a more remote eschatological visitation. For Amos, the Day of the Lord is both the immediate judgment of Israel by the Assyrians and a final eschatological salvation. Joel sees an imminent historical visitation of drought and locusts, but beyond this he sees the eschatological Day of the Lord. Zephaniah sees an imminent Day of the Lord in some undesignated historical visitation (Zep 1:2-18), but beyond it he sees the salvation of the Gentiles (3:9). The same God who acts in history to bless and judge his people will act at the end of history in an eschatological act of judgment and salvation. The prophets do not sharply distinguish between these two days, for it is one and the same God who is concerned to judge and save his people.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological hope of the prophets is always an ethical hope. That is to say, the prophets are not interested in the future for its own sake but for the impact of the future on the present. The prophetic predictions were given that, in light of future judgment and salvation, Israel might be confronted in the present by the will of God. “Prepare to meet your God as he comes in judgment, you people of Israel” (Am 4:12, <span>nlt<\/span>) might well be taken as the keynote of all the prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom of God embodied the same contrast between the present order and the future age as that of the prophets, and he expressed it in the idiom “this age and the age to come.” This fact is obscured in the <span>kjv<\/span>, which translates the word for “age” by “world.” These are, however, two different concepts. A rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). The context makes it clear that he was asking about eschatological life—the life of the resurrection (Dn 12:2). Jesus speaks of the difficulty of entering the kingdom of God. (The parallel passage in Matthew 19:23-24 has both “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven,” proving that they are interchangeable terms.) In their reaction the disciples ask, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus’ answer contrasts the lot of his disciples “in this time” with the “age to come” (Mk 10:29-30) when they would inherit eternal life. It is clear from this passage that in some sense the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, salvation, and eternal life all belong to the age to come. So far as this saying is concerned, God’s people will not experience eternal life until they do so in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew alone records the expression “the close of the age.” This age will be terminated by the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 24:3) and by the judgment of humanity (13:39-42). Then the righteous will be separated from the wicked (v 49). The same expression occurs in the promise of the risen Jesus assuring his disciples of his presence until the consummation of the age (28:20). It follows that if this age is to come to its consummation, it must be followed by another age—the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological kingdom will be inaugurated by an apocalyptic event—the glorious coming of the Son of Man. This is made clear by two of the parables about the kingdom of God. In the parable of the tares, “the Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire” (Mt 13:41-42, <span>rsv<\/span>). The parable of the sheep and goats reflects the same eschatology. When the Son of Man comes in his glory, he will sit on his glorious throne to judge the nations, separating the sheep from the goats. The righteous—the sheep—are to “inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world”; and entrance into the kingdom is synonymous with entrance into life (25:31-46, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological character of the kingdom of God is seen also in the other two parables of Matthew 25. “The kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom” (v 1, <span>rsv<\/span>). However, five of them were foolish and did not provide an adequate supply of oil for their lamps. Thus they were late for the wedding and were excluded from the wedding feast—a symbol of the eschatological kingdom—while those properly prepared entered the kingdom. In the same way the two faithful servants who had been “faithful over a little” were granted to “enter into the joy of your master” (vv 21, 23), while the unfaithful servant was excluded from the kingdom and cast into outer darkness.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus almost never showed any interest in descriptions of the eschatological kingdom, but it is clear that its coming was constantly in his thoughts. The pure in heart will see God (Mt 5:8). The harvest will take place and the grain will be gathered into the barn (13:30, 39; Mk 4:29). Jesus frequently used the metaphor of a feast or table fellowship to describe life in the eschatological kingdom. He will drink wine again with his disciples in the kingdom of God. They will eat and drink at Jesus’ table in the kingdom (Lk 22:30). People will be gathered from all corners of the earth to sit at a table with the OT saints (Mt 8:11-12; Lk 13:29). The consummation is likened to a wedding feast (Mt 22:1-14) and a banquet (Lk 14:16-24). All of these metaphors picture the restoration of communion between God and people, a union that had been broken by sin.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the sayings cited to illustrate the future character of the kingdom, “kingdom” refers to the eschatological order—the eschaton, the age to come. However, when Jesus taught his disciples to pray “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10), he was not referring to the new eschatological order; he was referring to the kingdom as God’s kingly rule, his reign. It is a prayer that God will effectively establish his sovereign rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>In his teaching about the kingdom of God as the apocalyptic consummation, Jesus does not differ essentially from the OT prophets. The most distinctive element in Jesus’ teaching—indeed, the fact that characterizes his entire mission and message—is the fact that in some real sense of the word, the kingdom of God has come in history in an utterly unexpected way. This sets Jesus’ teaching apart from all contemporary Jewish thought.<\/p>\n<p>This is seen first of all in his repeated teaching that his mission is a fulfillment of the OT messianic prophets. Mark summarizes Jesus’ message with the words “The Kingdom of God is near! Turn from your sins and believe this Good News!” (Mk 1:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). This saying can have one of two meanings. It may refer to the imminent coming of the apocalyptic kingdom. Matthew summarizes the message of John the Baptist with nearly the same words: “Turn from your sins and turn to God, because the Kingdom of Heaven is near” (Mt 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Baptist expounds what he means by the approach of the kingdom of God: “He is ready to separate the chaff from the grain with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, storing the grain in his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). John proclaimed an apocalyptic act; “unquenchable fire” can mean no strictly historical event but only an apocalyptic judgment. John expected Jesus to be the one in whom the cosmic event expected by the prophets would be carried out.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that this was also Jesus’ meaning. However, another interpretation is possible that is better supported by the actual course of his mission: “The time is fulfilled.” The messianic promises of the prophets were not only about to be fulfilled; they were actually in process of fulfillment in his mission. In Jesus, God was visiting his people. The hope of the prophets in some real sense was being realized.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of this can be seen in Luke’s introduction of Jesus’ ministry. Luke selects an event that occurred in Nazareth later in Jesus’ ministry (Lk 4:16-21) and places it at the beginning of his Gospel in order to sound this note of fulfillment. Jesus read from Isaiah a promise that looked forward to the messianic salvation: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he has appointed me to preach Good News to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released, that the blind will see, that the downtrodden will be freed from their oppressors, and that the time of the Lord’s favor has come” (vv 18-19, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then Jesus astonished his audience by the assertion “This Scripture has come true today before your very eyes!” (v 21, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Here was an amazing claim. John the Baptist had announced an apocalyptic visitation of God that would mean the fulfillment of the eschatological hope and the consummation of the messianic age. Jesus proclaimed that the messianic promise was actually being fulfilled in his person. This is no apocalyptic kingdom but a present salvation. In these words Jesus did not proclaim the imminence of the apocalyptic kingdom. Rather, he boldly announced that the kingdom of God had come. The presence of the kingdom was a happening, an event, the gracious action of God. This was no new theology or new idea or new promise; it was a new event in history.<\/p>\n<p>The note of fulfillment is again sounded in Jesus’ answer to the question about fasting. “Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can’t fast while they are with the groom” (Mk 2:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). The marriage feast had become a metaphor in Judaism for the messianic consummation. In these words Jesus announced the presence of the messianic time of salvation. It would be a contradiction in terms for the disciples to fast when they were enjoying the blessings of the messianic age. The time of fulfillment had come.<\/p>\n<p>A saying found in different contexts in Matthew and Luke touches this central note of the fulfillment in history of the OT hope: “Blessed are the eyes which see what you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it” (Lk 10:23-24, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 13:16-17). Both Matthew and Luke associate this saying with the kingdom of God, and both agree that the hope of former generations has become an object of experience. Many prophets and kings looked forward to something, but they looked in vain, for it did not come to them. What they longed for has now come, and this can be nothing less than the promised messianic salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Fulfillment in history is again asserted in Jesus’ answer to John’s question about the one who is to come (Mt 11:2-3). “The deeds of the Christ” (Messiah) were not the deeds John had announced. Wicked rulers like Herod were not being judged in fire. Instead, Jesus was helping people, not bringing an apocalyptic kingdom. Jesus replied in words that echo the promise of the messianic salvation in Isaiah 35:5-6: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Mt 11:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). In these words Jesus claimed that the blessings of the messianic salvation are present. There was indeed reason for John’s perplexity, for the fulfillment was not taking place along expected lines. The apocalyptic consummation did not appear to be on the horizon. The point of Jesus’ answer was that fulfillment was taking place without the eschatological consummation. Therefore, Jesus pronounced a special blessing upon those who were not offended by the character of the messianic fulfillment (v 6). The fulfillment was indeed taking place, but not the apocalyptic consummation.<\/p>\n<p>The most unambiguous statement of the presence of the kingdom is found in the words about the binding of Satan. One of Jesus’ most characteristic acts was the exorcism of demons—deliverance from satanic power. The Pharisees admitted his power but attributed it to Satan. Jesus replied, “If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? . . . But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God is come upon you” (Mt 12:26, 28, <span>rsv<\/span>). Here the verb has the clear meaning “to come, to arrive” (cf. Rom 9:30; 2 Cor 10:14; Phil 3:16). Here is a clear affirmation that the kingdom of God has come among men.<\/p>\n<p>In explanation Jesus said, “Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house” (Mt 12:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). The strong man is Satan; this “present evil age” (Gal 1:4) is his “house”; his “goods” are demon-possessed men and women. Jesus has invaded the strong man’s house to snatch away from him men and women whom he has in his power, and this is the work of the kingdom of God. The kingly reign of God has come into history in the person of Jesus before the apocalyptic consummation when Satan will be destroyed, to render Satan a preliminary defeat. Jesus has already “bound” Satan (i.e., curbed his power). This has been accomplished by the presence of the kingdom of God in the mission of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A similar saying is found in Luke 10:18. Jesus had sent a band of his disciples on a preaching mission. Like Jesus, they were to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom of God (Lk 10:9). They, too, were to exorcize demons. When they returned to Jesus to report their success, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>). This again is metaphorical language that asserts that in the mission of Jesus’ disciples, as well as in Jesus himself, Satan has fallen from his place of power. Both “binding” and “falling” are metaphors that describe the same truth: the victory of the kingdom of God over Satan.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the element that sets Jesus apart from the OT and from all of contemporary Judaism. The prophets conceived of the kingdom being established by a heavenly supernatural being (Dn 7) or ruled by a powerful Davidic messianic king (Is 9, 11). The fulfillment of the messianic hope is everywhere in the prophets an eschatological hope. The same is true of the Jewish writers who despaired of history and cast all hope into the future.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to all that had gone before him, Jesus proclaimed the kingdom of God as an event taking place in his own person and mission. God had again assumed the initiative; God was acting. No first-century Jew had any idea of the kingdom of God coming into history in the person of an ordinary man—a teacher who was meek and lowly.<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the kingdom is further seen in the fact that the rule of God, present in Jesus, is a gift to be received. This is also true of the kingdom in its eschatological consummation, where the kingdom is freely inherited by the righteous (Mt 25:34). In answer to the young man’s question about inheriting eternal life (Mk 10:17), Jesus spoke of entering the kingdom (vv 23-24) and receiving the gift of eternal life (v 30) as though they were synonymous. The kingdom is a gift that the Father is pleased to bestow upon the little flock of Jesus’ disciples (Lk 12:32).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s eschatological rule brings to his people the blessings of that kingdom, and if God’s kingdom is his rule invading history before the eschatological consummation, then we may expect God’s rule in the present to bring a preliminary blessing to his people. This fact is reflected in numerous sayings. The kingdom is something to be sought here and now (Mt 6:33) and to be received as children receive a gift (Mk 10:15; Lk 18:16-17). Although it is present in an unexpected form, the kingdom of God in Jesus’ person is like a hidden treasure or a pearl of great price whose possession outranks all other goods (Mt 13:44-46). The gift of the kingdom is also seen in that the deaf hear, the blind see, lepers are cleansed, and the poor have good news preached to them (11:5).<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>In the Gospel of John the concept of eternal life takes the place of the kingdom of God in Jesus’ teaching. The kingdom of God is mentioned twice (Jn 3:3, 5), and it is placed in connection with eternal life. The kingdom of God is here the eschatological kingdom, and eternal life is the life of the kingdom. Thus, as the kingdom of God in the synoptic Gospels is both future and present, so eternal life is both the life of the age to come (12:25) and also a present blessing (3:16, etc.).<\/p>\n<h5>Acts<\/h5>\n<p>In Acts it seems the earliest disciples generally failed to understand Jesus’ message about the kingdom of God as a present spiritual blessing. They gathered together to await the coming of the eschatological kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6). Acts relates that the disciples continued to preach the kingdom of God, but usually it is an eschatological blessing (8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). However, the last two references make the kingdom of God synonymous with the gospel about Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>One important theme in Acts is linked to that of the kingdom of God. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter announces that God has seated Jesus at his right hand in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1 (Acts 2:33-35). In the Psalms this is a prophecy of the enthronement of the Davidic king in Jerusalem. Peter asserts that this prophecy is now fulfilled in the heavenly reign of Jesus. Therefore, he has been made both Lord and Christ (Messiah). These are interchangeable terms, “Lord” meaning absolute sovereign, “Christ” meaning the messianic king.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>Paul carried further this theme of the heavenly rule of Christ, the anointed King. The kingdom is both an eschatological inheritance (1 Cor 6:9; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; 1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 1:5; 2 Tm 4:1, 18) and a present blessing into which believers now enter (Rom 14:17; Col 1:13). The key to this is the interchangeable character of lordship and messianic kingship. Jesus is now exalted as Lord over all (Phil 2:11), and even as his lordship is invisible, it will become manifest to all at his second coming. In the same way, he has been enthroned as messianic King by virtue of his resurrection and heavenly session, and he must reign as King until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:22). The last enemy to be destroyed is death.<\/p>\n<h5>Revelation<\/h5>\n<p>The central message of the Revelation to John is the consummation of God’s redemptive purpose, when the kingdom of this world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Revelation pictures the plight of a persecuted church in a hostile world, but it assures the church that Christ has already won a victory over the powers of evil (5:5), by virtue of which he can finally destroy them (19:11–20:14). Again, the last enemy to be destroyed is death (20:13-14). Revelation closes with a highly symbolic picture of the kingdom of God (chs 21–22) when God comes to dwell among his people, and “they shall see his face” (22:4). Thus the NT ends: divine order is restored to a disordered world. This is the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Teachings of; King; Parable.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>• In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughout Galilee teaching in the synagogues, preaching everywhere the Good News about the Kingdom” (Mt 4:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Sermon on the Mount is concerned with the righteousness that qualifies people to enter the kingdom of God (5:20). The collection of parables in Matthew 13 and Mark 4 illustrate the “mystery” of the kingdom of God (Mt 13:11; Mk 4:11). The establishment of the Lord’s Supper looks forward to the establishment of the kingdom of God (Mt 26:29; Mk 14:25).<\/p>\n<p>The NT reports two different forms of the expression: “the kingdom of God” and “the kingdom of the heavens.” The latter is found only in Matthew, but Matthew also has “the kingdom of God” four times (Mt 12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43). “The kingdom of heaven” is a Semitic phrase that would have been meaningful to Jews but not to Greeks. The Jews, out of reverence for God, avoided uttering the divine name, and contemporary literature gives examples of substituting the word “heaven” for God (1 Macc 3:18, 50; 4:10; see Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>The key to an understanding of the kingdom of God is that the basic meaning of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span><em>,<\/em> as also of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>,<\/em> is rule, reign, dominion. We frequently find in the OT the expression “in the year of the kingdom of . . . ,” meaning in the year of the reign of a given king (e.g., 1 Chr 26:31; 2 Chr 3:2; 15:10; Ezr 7:1; 8:1; Est 2:16; Jer 10:7; 52:31). When we read that Solomon’s kingdom was firmly established (1 Kgs 2:12), we are to understand that his authority to reign was settled. To “turn the kingdom of Saul over to [David]” (1 Chr 12:23, <span>kjv<\/span>) indicates that the authority that had been Saul’s was given to David. As a result of having received legal authority, David became king. This abstract idea of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is evident when it is found in parallelisms with such ideas as power, might, glory, and dominion (Dn 4:34; 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>When <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span> is used of God, it almost always refers to his authority or to his rule as the heavenly King. “They will talk together about the glory of your kingdom; they will celebrate examples of your power. . . . For your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. You rule generation after generation” (Ps 145:11, 13, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Further, if a king rules, there must be a realm or sphere over which he reigns. This is also called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malkut<\/span><em>.<\/em> “So the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet, for his God gave him rest round about” (2 Chr 20:30, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Est 3:6; Jer 10:7; Dn 9:1; 11:9).<\/p>\n<p>This same twofold use of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> is found in the NT. In fact, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> could be translated by the expression “kingly power” in Luke 23:42 (<span>niv<\/span> mg) and by “kingship” in John 18:36. When a nobleman went into a far country to get a “kingdom” (Luke 19:12, <span>nasb<\/span>) he went to the governing authority to get an appointment as king. When Jesus said, “My kingship is not of this world” (Jn 18:36, <span>rsv<\/span>), he did not mean to say that his rule has nothing to do with the world but rather that his kingship—his dominion—does not come from man but from God. Therefore, he rejects the use of worldly fighting to gain his ends.<\/p>\n<p>This central meaning of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">basileia<\/span> makes it easy to understand many sayings in the Gospels. In the Lord’s Prayer the petition “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10) is a prayer for God to manifest his reign so that his will may be done on earth as it is in heaven. When we read that we are to “receive the kingdom of God like a child” (Mk 10:15, <span>rsv<\/span>), we must open our hearts and lives to the rule of God.<\/p>\n<p>Also in the NT are sayings about being <em>in<\/em> the kingdom or of <em>entering<\/em> the kingdom (Mt 8:11; Mk 9:47; 10:23-25; Lk 13:28). There is no philological or theological objection to understanding “the kingdom of God” first as the divine reign or rule and second as the sphere of blessing in which that reign is experienced.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentBackground\">Old Testament Background<\/p>\n<p>The expression “the kingdom of God” is not found in the OT, but the idea appears throughout the prophets. God is frequently spoken of as the King, both of Israel (Ex 15:18; Nm 23:21; Dt 33:5; Is 43:15) and of all the earth (2 Kgs 19:15; Pss 29:10; 47:2; 93:1-2; 96:10; 97:1-9; 99:1-4; 145:11-13; Is 6:5; Jer 46:18). Although God is not the earthly King of Israel, other references speak of a day when God shall become King and shall rule over his people (Is 24:23; 33:22; 52:7; Ob 1:21; Zep 3:15; Zec 14:9-11).<\/p>\n<p>This brief summary of God’s kingship provides the outline for the entire OT concept. While God is King over all the earth, he is in a special way King over his people, Israel. God’s rule is therefore something realized in Israel’s history. However, it is only partially and imperfectly realized. Israel again and again rebelled against the divine sovereignty. Furthermore, Israel was constantly plagued by wars with its pagan neighbors in which it was not always victorious. Again, there are evils in nature and the physical world that often bring suffering to God’s people. Therefore, the prophets look forward to a day when God’s rule will be fully experienced, not by Israel alone, but by all the world. The main emphasis of the prophets is on hope, the establishing of God’s perfect rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets describe the final establishment of God’s kingdom in terms of a theophany—a divine visitation (Mi 1:3-4). Zechariah foresees a “Day of the Lord” when all nations will be gathered in battle against Jerusalem, when the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations (Zec 14:3, 5). Israel will be visited by the Lord (Is 29:6) and delivered from its enemies (35:4; 59:20). God’s coming will also mean judgment (2:21; 26:21). This final coming of God will mean the salvation of the Gentiles as well as of Israel (Zec 2:10-11; cf. Is 66:18-24).<\/p>\n<p>Behind this language is a distinct theology of “the God who comes.” It is a fact widely recognized in contemporary OT theology that the God of the OT is not a nature god, like the gods of other peoples, but a God of history—a God who visits his people in history to bless or to judge them. God visited Israel in Egypt to deliver them from bondage and to constitute them as his people. The rescue from Egypt was not merely an act of deliverance; it was an act through which God made himself known and through which Israel was to know and serve him.<\/p>\n<p>Because God has visited his people again and again in their history, he must finally come to them in the future to judge wickedness and to establish his kingdom. Israel’s hope is thus rooted in history, or rather in the God who works in history. God will finally break into history in a glorious theophany to establish his rule in all the earth. The source of the kingdom is not history itself but God.<\/p>\n<p>While the prophets visualize the kingdom as coming from God, the kingdom is always on earth. The divine irruption into the natural order is not designed to accomplish its destruction but to make way for a new, perfect order arising out of the old, imperfect one. The prophets do not present a single consistent picture of the new order. Sometimes the new order is described very much in this-worldly terms. “The terraced vineyards on the hills of Israel will drip with sweet wine” (Am 9:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). On the other hand, God will create new heavens and a new earth (Is 65:17; 66:22), where there will be untroubled joy, prosperity, peace, and righteousness. The final visitation of God will mean the redemption of the world, for a redeemed earth is the scene of the kingdom of God. The prophets look forward again and again to the deliverance of creation “from the bondage to decay.” The description is often couched in simple physical terms. The wilderness will become fruitful (32:15); the desert will blossom (35:2); sorrow and sighing will flee away (v 10). The burning sands will be cooled and the dry places become springs of water (v 7); peace will return to the animal world so that all injury and destruction are done away with (11:6). All this results because the earth becomes full of the knowledge of God (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>Such language is not mere poetry but reflects a profound theology of creation. Humans as creatures were made to dwell on the earth, and the earth shares in human destiny. The main point is that creation as such is good and not a hindrance to true spirituality, as was often true in Greek thought. Redemption always includes redemption of the earth, which then becomes the blessed environment God intended it to be. Salvation does not mean deliverance from creaturehood, for this is not an evil thing but an essential and permanent element of true, human existence. Salvation does not mean escape from bodily creaturely existence, as in some Greek thought. On the contrary, ultimate redemption will mean the redemption of the whole person. The emergence of the doctrine of bodily resurrection is a reflection of this theology of creaturehood. The corollary of this is that creation in its entirety must share in the blessing of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>A distinctive element in prophetic eschatology is the tension between history and eschatology. That is, as the prophets looked into the future, they saw an immediate historical judgment as well as a more remote eschatological visitation. For Amos, the Day of the Lord is both the immediate judgment of Israel by the Assyrians and a final eschatological salvation. Joel sees an imminent historical visitation of drought and locusts, but beyond this he sees the eschatological Day of the Lord. Zephaniah sees an imminent Day of the Lord in some undesignated historical visitation (Zep 1:2-18), but beyond it he sees the salvation of the Gentiles (3:9). The same God who acts in history to bless and judge his people will act at the end of history in an eschatological act of judgment and salvation. The prophets do not sharply distinguish between these two days, for it is one and the same God who is concerned to judge and save his people.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological hope of the prophets is always an ethical hope. That is to say, the prophets are not interested in the future for its own sake but for the impact of the future on the present. The prophetic predictions were given that, in light of future judgment and salvation, Israel might be confronted in the present by the will of God. “Prepare to meet your God as he comes in judgment, you people of Israel” (Am 4:12, <span>nlt<\/span>) might well be taken as the keynote of all the prophets.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom of God embodied the same contrast between the present order and the future age as that of the prophets, and he expressed it in the idiom “this age and the age to come.” This fact is obscured in the <span>kjv<\/span>, which translates the word for “age” by “world.” These are, however, two different concepts. A rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life (Mk 10:17). The context makes it clear that he was asking about eschatological life—the life of the resurrection (Dn 12:2). Jesus speaks of the difficulty of entering the kingdom of God. (The parallel passage in Matthew 19:23-24 has both “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven,” proving that they are interchangeable terms.) In their reaction the disciples ask, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus’ answer contrasts the lot of his disciples “in this time” with the “age to come” (Mk 10:29-30) when they would inherit eternal life. It is clear from this passage that in some sense the kingdom of God, the kingdom of heaven, salvation, and eternal life all belong to the age to come. So far as this saying is concerned, God’s people will not experience eternal life until they do so in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew alone records the expression “the close of the age.” This age will be terminated by the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 24:3) and by the judgment of humanity (13:39-42). Then the righteous will be separated from the wicked (v 49). The same expression occurs in the promise of the risen Jesus assuring his disciples of his presence until the consummation of the age (28:20). It follows that if this age is to come to its consummation, it must be followed by another age—the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological kingdom will be inaugurated by an apocalyptic event—the glorious coming of the Son of Man. This is made clear by two of the parables about the kingdom of God. In the parable of the tares, “the Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire” (Mt 13:41-42, <span>rsv<\/span>). The parable of the sheep and goats reflects the same eschatology. When the Son of Man comes in his glory, he will sit on his glorious throne to judge the nations, separating the sheep from the goats. The righteous—the sheep—are to “inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world”; and entrance into the kingdom is synonymous with entrance into life (25:31-46, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The eschatological character of the kingdom of God is seen also in the other two parables of Matthew 25. “The kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens who took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom” (v 1, <span>rsv<\/span>). However, five of them were foolish and did not provide an adequate supply of oil for their lamps. Thus they were late for the wedding and were excluded from the wedding feast—a symbol of the eschatological kingdom—while those properly prepared entered the kingdom. In the same way the two faithful servants who had been “faithful over a little” were granted to “enter into the joy of your master” (vv 21, 23), while the unfaithful servant was excluded from the kingdom and cast into outer darkness.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus almost never showed any interest in descriptions of the eschatological kingdom, but it is clear that its coming was constantly in his thoughts. The pure in heart will see God (Mt 5:8). The harvest will take place and the grain will be gathered into the barn (13:30, 39; Mk 4:29). Jesus frequently used the metaphor of a feast or table fellowship to describe life in the eschatological kingdom. He will drink wine again with his disciples in the kingdom of God. They will eat and drink at Jesus’ table in the kingdom (Lk 22:30). People will be gathered from all corners of the earth to sit at a table with the OT saints (Mt 8:11-12; Lk 13:29). The consummation is likened to a wedding feast (Mt 22:1-14) and a banquet (Lk 14:16-24). All of these metaphors picture the restoration of communion between God and people, a union that had been broken by sin.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the sayings cited to illustrate the future character of the kingdom, “kingdom” refers to the eschatological order—the eschaton, the age to come. However, when Jesus taught his disciples to pray “Thy kingdom come” (Mt 6:10), he was not referring to the new eschatological order; he was referring to the kingdom as God’s kingly rule, his reign. It is a prayer that God will effectively establish his sovereign rule in the world.<\/p>\n<p>In his teaching about the kingdom of God as the apocalyptic consummation, Jesus does not differ essentially from the OT prophets. The most distinctive element in Jesus’ teaching—indeed, the fact that characterizes his entire mission and message—is the fact that in some real sense of the word, the kingdom of God has come in history in an utterly unexpected way. This sets Jesus’ teaching apart from all contemporary Jewish thought.<\/p>\n<p>This is seen first of all in his repeated teaching that his mission is a fulfillment of the OT messianic prophets. Mark summarizes Jesus’ message with the words “The Kingdom of God is near! Turn from your sins and believe this Good News!” (Mk 1:15, <span>nlt<\/span>). This saying can have one of two meanings. It may refer to the imminent coming of the apocalyptic kingdom. Matthew summarizes the message of John the Baptist with nearly the same words: “Turn from your sins and turn to God, because the Kingdom of Heaven is near” (Mt 3:2, <span>nlt<\/span>). The Baptist expounds what he means by the approach of the kingdom of God: “He is ready to separate the chaff from the grain with his winnowing fork. Then he will clean up the threshing area, storing the grain in his barn but burning the chaff with never-ending fire” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). John proclaimed an apocalyptic act; “unquenchable fire” can mean no strictly historical event but only an apocalyptic judgment. John expected Jesus to be the one in whom the cosmic event expected by the prophets would be carried out.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that this was also Jesus’ meaning. However, another interpretation is possible that is better supported by the actual course of his mission: “The time is fulfilled.” The messianic promises of the prophets were not only about to be fulfilled; they were actually in process of fulfillment in his mission. In Jesus, God was visiting his people. The hope of the prophets in some real sense was being realized.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of this can be seen in Luke’s introduction of Jesus’ ministry. Luke selects an event that occurred in Nazareth later in Jesus’ ministry (Lk 4:16-21) and places it at the beginning of his Gospel in order to sound this note of fulfillment. Jesus read from Isaiah a promise that looked forward to the messianic salvation: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, for he has appointed me to preach Good News to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim that captives will be released, that the blind will see, that the downtrodden will be freed from their oppressors, and that the time of the Lord’s favor has come” (vv 18-19, <span>nlt<\/span>). Then Jesus astonished his audience by the assertion “This Scripture has come true today before your very eyes!” (v 21, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Here was an amazing claim. John the Baptist had announced an apocalyptic visitation of God that would mean the fulfillment of the eschatological hope and the consummation of the messianic age. Jesus proclaimed that the messianic promise was actually being fulfilled in his person. This is no apocalyptic kingdom but a present salvation. In these words Jesus did not proclaim the imminence of the apocalyptic kingdom. Rather, he boldly announced that the kingdom of God had come. The presence of the kingdom was a happening, an event, the gracious action of God. This was no new theology or new idea or new promise; it was a new event in history.<\/p>\n<p>The note of fulfillment is again sounded in Jesus’ answer to the question about fasting. “Do wedding guests fast while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. They can’t fast while they are with the groom” (Mk 2:19, <span>nlt<\/span>). The marriage feast had become a metaphor in Judaism for the messianic consummation. In these words Jesus announced the presence of the messianic time of salvation. It would be a contradiction in terms for the disciples to fast when they were enjoying the blessings of the messianic age. The time of fulfillment had come.<\/p>\n<p>A saying found in different contexts in Matthew and Luke touches this central note of the fulfillment in history of the OT hope: “Blessed are the eyes which see what you see! For I tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it” (Lk 10:23-24, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 13:16-17). Both Matthew and Luke associate this saying with the kingdom of God, and both agree that the hope of former generations has become an object of experience. Many prophets and kings looked forward to something, but they looked in vain, for it did not come to them. What they longed for has now come, and this can be nothing less than the promised messianic salvation.<\/p>\n<p>Fulfillment in history is again asserted in Jesus’ answer to John’s question about the one who is to come (Mt 11:2-3). “The deeds of the Christ” (Messiah) were not the deeds John had announced. Wicked rulers like Herod were not being judged in fire. Instead, Jesus was helping people, not bringing an apocalyptic kingdom. Jesus replied in words that echo the promise of the messianic salvation in Isaiah 35:5-6: “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them” (Mt 11:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). In these words Jesus claimed that the blessings of the messianic salvation are present. There was indeed reason for John’s perplexity, for the fulfillment was not taking place along expected lines. The apocalyptic consummation did not appear to be on the horizon. The point of Jesus’ answer was that fulfillment was taking place without the eschatological consummation. Therefore, Jesus pronounced a special blessing upon those who were not offended by the character of the messianic fulfillment (v 6). The fulfillment was indeed taking place, but not the apocalyptic consummation.<\/p>\n<p>The most unambiguous statement of the presence of the kingdom is found in the words about the binding of Satan. One of Jesus’ most characteristic acts was the exorcism of demons—deliverance from satanic power. The Pharisees admitted his power but attributed it to Satan. Jesus replied, “If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? . . . But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God is come upon you” (Mt 12:26, 28, <span>rsv<\/span>). Here the verb has the clear meaning “to come, to arrive” (cf. Rom 9:30; 2 Cor 10:14; Phil 3:16). Here is a clear affirmation that the kingdom of God has come among men.<\/p>\n<p>In explanation Jesus said, “Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house” (Mt 12:29, <span>rsv<\/span>). The strong man is Satan; this “present evil age” (Gal 1:4) is his “house”; his “goods” are demon-possessed men and women. Jesus has invaded the strong man’s house to snatch away from him men and women whom he has in his power, and this is the work of the kingdom of God. The kingly reign of God has come into history in the person of Jesus before the apocalyptic consummation when Satan will be destroyed, to render Satan a preliminary defeat. Jesus has already “bound” Satan (i.e., curbed his power). This has been accomplished by the presence of the kingdom of God in the mission of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A similar saying is found in Luke 10:18. Jesus had sent a band of his disciples on a preaching mission. Like Jesus, they were to proclaim the nearness of the kingdom of God (Lk 10:9). They, too, were to exorcize demons. When they returned to Jesus to report their success, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>). This again is metaphorical language that asserts that in the mission of Jesus’ disciples, as well as in Jesus himself, Satan has fallen from his place of power. Both “binding” and “falling” are metaphors that describe the same truth: the victory of the kingdom of God over Satan.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the element that sets Jesus apart from the OT and from all of contemporary Judaism. The prophets conceived of the kingdom being established by a heavenly supernatural being (Dn 7) or ruled by a powerful Davidic messianic king (Is 9, 11). The fulfillment of the messianic hope is everywhere in the prophets an eschatological hope. The same is true of the Jewish writers who despaired of history and cast all hope into the future.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to all that had gone before him, Jesus proclaimed the kingdom of God as an event taking place in his own person and mission. God had again assumed the initiative; God was acting. No first-century Jew had any idea of the kingdom of God coming into history in the person of an ordinary man—a teacher who was meek and lowly.<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the kingdom is further seen in the fact that the rule of God, present in Jesus, is a gift to be received. This is also true of the kingdom in its eschatological consummation, where the kingdom is freely inherited by the righteous (Mt 25:34). In answer to the young man’s question about inheriting eternal life (Mk 10:17), Jesus spoke of entering the kingdom (vv 23-24) and receiving the gift of eternal life (v 30) as though they were synonymous. The kingdom is a gift that the Father is pleased to bestow upon the little flock of Jesus’ disciples (Lk 12:32).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s eschatological rule brings to his people the blessings of that kingdom, and if God’s kingdom is his rule invading history before the eschatological consummation, then we may expect God’s rule in the present to bring a preliminary blessing to his people. This fact is reflected in numerous sayings. The kingdom is something to be sought here and now (Mt 6:33) and to be received as children receive a gift (Mk 10:15; Lk 18:16-17). Although it is present in an unexpected form, the kingdom of God in Jesus’ person is like a hidden treasure or a pearl of great price whose possession outranks all other goods (Mt 13:44-46). The gift of the kingdom is also seen in that the deaf hear, the blind see, lepers are cleansed, and the poor have good news preached to them (11:5).<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>In the Gospel of John the concept of eternal life takes the place of the kingdom of God in Jesus’ teaching. The kingdom of God is mentioned twice (Jn 3:3, 5), and it is placed in connection with eternal life. The kingdom of God is here the eschatological kingdom, and eternal life is the life of the kingdom. Thus, as the kingdom of God in the synoptic Gospels is both future and present, so eternal life is both the life of the age to come (12:25) and also a present blessing (3:16, etc.).<\/p>\n<h5>Acts<\/h5>\n<p>In Acts it seems the earliest disciples generally failed to understand Jesus’ message about the kingdom of God as a present spiritual blessing. They gathered together to await the coming of the eschatological kingdom to Israel (Acts 1:6). Acts relates that the disciples continued to preach the kingdom of God, but usually it is an eschatological blessing (8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31). However, the last two references make the kingdom of God synonymous with the gospel about Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>One important theme in Acts is linked to that of the kingdom of God. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter announces that God has seated Jesus at his right hand in fulfillment of Psalm 110:1 (Acts 2:33-35). In the Psalms this is a prophecy of the enthronement of the Davidic king in Jerusalem. Peter asserts that this prophecy is now fulfilled in the heavenly reign of Jesus. Therefore, he has been made both Lord and Christ (Messiah). These are interchangeable terms, “Lord” meaning absolute sovereign, “Christ” meaning the messianic king.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>Paul carried further this theme of the heavenly rule of Christ, the anointed King. The kingdom is both an eschatological inheritance (1 Cor 6:9; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; 1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 1:5; 2 Tm 4:1, 18) and a present blessing into which believers now enter (Rom 14:17; Col 1:13). The key to this is the interchangeable character of lordship and messianic kingship. Jesus is now exalted as Lord over all (Phil 2:11), and even as his lordship is invisible, it will become manifest to all at his second coming. In the same way, he has been enthroned as messianic King by virtue of his resurrection and heavenly session, and he must reign as King until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:22). The last enemy to be destroyed is death.<\/p>\n<h5>Revelation<\/h5>\n<p>The central message of the Revelation to John is the consummation of God’s redemptive purpose, when the kingdom of this world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Revelation pictures the plight of a persecuted church in a hostile world, but it assures the church that Christ has already won a victory over the powers of evil (5:5), by virtue of which he can finally destroy them (19:11–20:14). Again, the last enemy to be destroyed is death (20:13-14). Revelation closes with a highly symbolic picture of the kingdom of God (chs 21–22) when God comes to dwell among his people, and “they shall see his face” (22:4). Thus the NT ends: divine order is restored to a disordered world. This is the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Teachings of; King; Parable.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Preview • Introduction • Old Testament Background • In the New Testament Introduction According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughou...","summary_en":"KINGDOM OF GOD, KINGDOM OF HEAVEN The sovereign rule of God, initiated by Christ’s earthly ministry and consummated when the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ (Rv 11:15). Preview • Introduction • Old Testament Background • In the New Testament Introduction According to the testimony of the first three Gospels, the proclamation of the kingdom of God was Jesus’ central message. Matthew summarizes the Galilean ministry with the words “Jesus traveled throughou...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54696,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:6","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:6<\/strong> <em>who do not fall away because of me:<\/em> The works listed in 11:5 were intended to drive John and his disciples to a decision regarding Jesus. Jesus was aware, however, that certain unexpected elements of his ministry would cause some to reject him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:6<\/strong> <em>who do not fall away because of me:<\/em> The works listed in 11:5 were intended to drive John and his disciples to a decision regarding Jesus. Jesus was aware, however, that certain unexpected elements of his ministry would cause some to reject him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:6 who do not fall away because of me: The works listed in 11:5 were intended to drive John and his disciples to a decision regarding Jesus. Jesus was aware, however, that certain unexpected elements of his ministry would cause some to reject him.","summary_en":"11:6 who do not fall away because of me: The works listed in 11:5 were intended to drive John and his disciples to a decision regarding Jesus. Jesus was aware, however, that certain unexpected elements of his ministry would cause some to reject him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82322,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:6","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:6<\/strong> <em>who do not fall away because of me:<\/em> The works listed in 11:5 were intended to drive John and his disciples to a decision regarding Jesus. Jesus was aware, however, that certain unexpected elements of his ministry would cause some to reject him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:6<\/strong> <em>who do not fall away because of me:<\/em> The works listed in 11:5 were intended to drive John and his disciples to a decision regarding Jesus. Jesus was aware, however, that certain unexpected elements of his ministry would cause some to reject him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:6 who do not fall away because of me: The works listed in 11:5 were intended to drive John and his disciples to a decision regarding Jesus. Jesus was aware, however, that certain unexpected elements of his ministry would cause some to reject him.","summary_en":"11:6 who do not fall away because of me: The works listed in 11:5 were intended to drive John and his disciples to a decision regarding Jesus. Jesus was aware, however, that certain unexpected elements of his ministry would cause some to reject him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":109948,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:6","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:6<\/strong> <em>who do not fall away because of me:<\/em> The works listed in 11:5 were intended to drive John and his disciples to a decision regarding Jesus. Jesus was aware, however, that certain unexpected elements of his ministry would cause some to reject him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:6<\/strong> <em>who do not fall away because of me:<\/em> The works listed in 11:5 were intended to drive John and his disciples to a decision regarding Jesus. Jesus was aware, however, that certain unexpected elements of his ministry would cause some to reject him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:6 who do not fall away because of me: The works listed in 11:5 were intended to drive John and his disciples to a decision regarding Jesus. Jesus was aware, however, that certain unexpected elements of his ministry would cause some to reject him.","summary_en":"11:6 who do not fall away because of me: The works listed in 11:5 were intended to drive John and his disciples to a decision regarding Jesus. Jesus was aware, however, that certain unexpected elements of his ministry would cause some to reject him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137574,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:6","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:6<\/strong> <em>who do not fall away because of me:<\/em> The works listed in 11:5 were intended to drive John and his disciples to a decision regarding Jesus. Jesus was aware, however, that certain unexpected elements of his ministry would cause some to reject him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:6<\/strong> <em>who do not fall away because of me:<\/em> The works listed in 11:5 were intended to drive John and his disciples to a decision regarding Jesus. Jesus was aware, however, that certain unexpected elements of his ministry would cause some to reject him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:6 who do not fall away because of me: The works listed in 11:5 were intended to drive John and his disciples to a decision regarding Jesus. Jesus was aware, however, that certain unexpected elements of his ministry would cause some to reject him.","summary_en":"11:6 who do not fall away because of me: The works listed in 11:5 were intended to drive John and his disciples to a decision regarding Jesus. Jesus was aware, however, that certain unexpected elements of his ministry would cause some to reject him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64899,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Blessings of Jesus","title_en":"The Blessings of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Blessings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for <em>blessed<\/em> as <span class=\"latin\" lang=\"la\">beati<\/span>. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor.<\/p>\n<p>The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and women to follow him as he proclaims the message of the Kingdom to Israel (see also Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46). Those who are blessed have repented in response to the proclamation of the Kingdom (Matt 4:17-22). The Beatitudes are connected with Isa 61:1-3: The Spirit endows, leads to proclamation, and blesses the poor, the humble, and the righteous.<\/p>\n<p>The NLT’s use of “God blesses” conveys the ideas of divine origin and approval (see Matt 25:34), fulfillment (see Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17), reversal (see Luke 1:1–2:52; 6:20-26), and the condition of obedience required in order to enjoy the blessings (see Pss 1:1, 3-6; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Prov 8:32; Isa 56:2). The blessings are inaugurated with the Messiah’s coming, with a confident hope that they will be enjoyed eternally and completely.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 1:1-3; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Isa 56:1-2; Matt 5:3-12; 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46; 25:34; Luke 6:20-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Blessings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for <em>blessed<\/em> as <span class=\"latin\" lang=\"la\">beati<\/span>. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor.<\/p>\n<p>The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and women to follow him as he proclaims the message of the Kingdom to Israel (see also Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46). Those who are blessed have repented in response to the proclamation of the Kingdom (Matt 4:17-22). The Beatitudes are connected with Isa 61:1-3: The Spirit endows, leads to proclamation, and blesses the poor, the humble, and the righteous.<\/p>\n<p>The NLT’s use of “God blesses” conveys the ideas of divine origin and approval (see Matt 25:34), fulfillment (see Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17), reversal (see Luke 1:1–2:52; 6:20-26), and the condition of obedience required in order to enjoy the blessings (see Pss 1:1, 3-6; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Prov 8:32; Isa 56:2). The blessings are inaugurated with the Messiah’s coming, with a confident hope that they will be enjoyed eternally and completely.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 1:1-3; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Isa 56:1-2; Matt 5:3-12; 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46; 25:34; Luke 6:20-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Blessings of Jesus The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for blessed as beati. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor. The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and wome...","summary_en":"The Blessings of Jesus The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for blessed as beati. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor. The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and wome...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92525,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Blessings of Jesus","title_en":"The Blessings of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Blessings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for <em>blessed<\/em> as <span class=\"latin\" lang=\"la\">beati<\/span>. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor.<\/p>\n<p>The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and women to follow him as he proclaims the message of the Kingdom to Israel (see also Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46). Those who are blessed have repented in response to the proclamation of the Kingdom (Matt 4:17-22). The Beatitudes are connected with Isa 61:1-3: The Spirit endows, leads to proclamation, and blesses the poor, the humble, and the righteous.<\/p>\n<p>The NLT’s use of “God blesses” conveys the ideas of divine origin and approval (see Matt 25:34), fulfillment (see Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17), reversal (see Luke 1:1–2:52; 6:20-26), and the condition of obedience required in order to enjoy the blessings (see Pss 1:1, 3-6; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Prov 8:32; Isa 56:2). The blessings are inaugurated with the Messiah’s coming, with a confident hope that they will be enjoyed eternally and completely.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 1:1-3; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Isa 56:1-2; Matt 5:3-12; 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46; 25:34; Luke 6:20-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Blessings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for <em>blessed<\/em> as <span class=\"latin\" lang=\"la\">beati<\/span>. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor.<\/p>\n<p>The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and women to follow him as he proclaims the message of the Kingdom to Israel (see also Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46). Those who are blessed have repented in response to the proclamation of the Kingdom (Matt 4:17-22). The Beatitudes are connected with Isa 61:1-3: The Spirit endows, leads to proclamation, and blesses the poor, the humble, and the righteous.<\/p>\n<p>The NLT’s use of “God blesses” conveys the ideas of divine origin and approval (see Matt 25:34), fulfillment (see Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17), reversal (see Luke 1:1–2:52; 6:20-26), and the condition of obedience required in order to enjoy the blessings (see Pss 1:1, 3-6; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Prov 8:32; Isa 56:2). The blessings are inaugurated with the Messiah’s coming, with a confident hope that they will be enjoyed eternally and completely.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 1:1-3; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Isa 56:1-2; Matt 5:3-12; 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46; 25:34; Luke 6:20-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Blessings of Jesus The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for blessed as beati. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor. The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and wome...","summary_en":"The Blessings of Jesus The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for blessed as beati. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor. The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and wome...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120151,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Blessings of Jesus","title_en":"The Blessings of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Blessings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for <em>blessed<\/em> as <span class=\"latin\" lang=\"la\">beati<\/span>. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor.<\/p>\n<p>The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and women to follow him as he proclaims the message of the Kingdom to Israel (see also Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46). Those who are blessed have repented in response to the proclamation of the Kingdom (Matt 4:17-22). The Beatitudes are connected with Isa 61:1-3: The Spirit endows, leads to proclamation, and blesses the poor, the humble, and the righteous.<\/p>\n<p>The NLT’s use of “God blesses” conveys the ideas of divine origin and approval (see Matt 25:34), fulfillment (see Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17), reversal (see Luke 1:1–2:52; 6:20-26), and the condition of obedience required in order to enjoy the blessings (see Pss 1:1, 3-6; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Prov 8:32; Isa 56:2). The blessings are inaugurated with the Messiah’s coming, with a confident hope that they will be enjoyed eternally and completely.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 1:1-3; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Isa 56:1-2; Matt 5:3-12; 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46; 25:34; Luke 6:20-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Blessings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for <em>blessed<\/em> as <span class=\"latin\" lang=\"la\">beati<\/span>. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor.<\/p>\n<p>The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and women to follow him as he proclaims the message of the Kingdom to Israel (see also Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46). Those who are blessed have repented in response to the proclamation of the Kingdom (Matt 4:17-22). The Beatitudes are connected with Isa 61:1-3: The Spirit endows, leads to proclamation, and blesses the poor, the humble, and the righteous.<\/p>\n<p>The NLT’s use of “God blesses” conveys the ideas of divine origin and approval (see Matt 25:34), fulfillment (see Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17), reversal (see Luke 1:1–2:52; 6:20-26), and the condition of obedience required in order to enjoy the blessings (see Pss 1:1, 3-6; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Prov 8:32; Isa 56:2). The blessings are inaugurated with the Messiah’s coming, with a confident hope that they will be enjoyed eternally and completely.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 1:1-3; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Isa 56:1-2; Matt 5:3-12; 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46; 25:34; Luke 6:20-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Blessings of Jesus The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for blessed as beati. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor. The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and wome...","summary_en":"The Blessings of Jesus The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for blessed as beati. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor. The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and wome...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147777,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Blessings of Jesus","title_en":"The Blessings of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Blessings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for <em>blessed<\/em> as <span class=\"latin\" lang=\"la\">beati<\/span>. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor.<\/p>\n<p>The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and women to follow him as he proclaims the message of the Kingdom to Israel (see also Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46). Those who are blessed have repented in response to the proclamation of the Kingdom (Matt 4:17-22). The Beatitudes are connected with Isa 61:1-3: The Spirit endows, leads to proclamation, and blesses the poor, the humble, and the righteous.<\/p>\n<p>The NLT’s use of “God blesses” conveys the ideas of divine origin and approval (see Matt 25:34), fulfillment (see Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17), reversal (see Luke 1:1–2:52; 6:20-26), and the condition of obedience required in order to enjoy the blessings (see Pss 1:1, 3-6; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Prov 8:32; Isa 56:2). The blessings are inaugurated with the Messiah’s coming, with a confident hope that they will be enjoyed eternally and completely.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 1:1-3; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Isa 56:1-2; Matt 5:3-12; 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46; 25:34; Luke 6:20-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Blessings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for <em>blessed<\/em> as <span class=\"latin\" lang=\"la\">beati<\/span>. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor.<\/p>\n<p>The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and women to follow him as he proclaims the message of the Kingdom to Israel (see also Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46). Those who are blessed have repented in response to the proclamation of the Kingdom (Matt 4:17-22). The Beatitudes are connected with Isa 61:1-3: The Spirit endows, leads to proclamation, and blesses the poor, the humble, and the righteous.<\/p>\n<p>The NLT’s use of “God blesses” conveys the ideas of divine origin and approval (see Matt 25:34), fulfillment (see Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17), reversal (see Luke 1:1–2:52; 6:20-26), and the condition of obedience required in order to enjoy the blessings (see Pss 1:1, 3-6; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Prov 8:32; Isa 56:2). The blessings are inaugurated with the Messiah’s coming, with a confident hope that they will be enjoyed eternally and completely.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 1:1-3; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Isa 56:1-2; Matt 5:3-12; 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46; 25:34; Luke 6:20-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Blessings of Jesus The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for blessed as beati. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor. The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and wome...","summary_en":"The Blessings of Jesus The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for blessed as beati. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor. The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and wome...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"7":[{"id":41559,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Elijah","title_en":"Elijah","content_ro":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","summary_en":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69185,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Elijah","title_en":"Elijah","content_ro":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","summary_en":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":96811,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Elijah","title_en":"Elijah","content_ro":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","summary_en":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124437,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Elijah","title_en":"Elijah","content_ro":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","summary_en":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20347,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","summary_en":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24757,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of Matthew","title_en":"Gospel of Matthew","content_ro":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","summary_en":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54697,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:7","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:7<\/strong> <em>a weak reed, swayed by every breath of wind:<\/em> An unstable person. The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is no.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:7<\/strong> <em>a weak reed, swayed by every breath of wind:<\/em> An unstable person. The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is no.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:7 a weak reed, swayed by every breath of wind: An unstable person. The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is no.","summary_en":"11:7 a weak reed, swayed by every breath of wind: An unstable person. The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is no.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82323,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:7","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:7<\/strong> <em>a weak reed, swayed by every breath of wind:<\/em> An unstable person. The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is no.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:7<\/strong> <em>a weak reed, swayed by every breath of wind:<\/em> An unstable person. The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is no.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:7 a weak reed, swayed by every breath of wind: An unstable person. The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is no.","summary_en":"11:7 a weak reed, swayed by every breath of wind: An unstable person. The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is no.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":109949,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:7","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:7<\/strong> <em>a weak reed, swayed by every breath of wind:<\/em> An unstable person. The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is no.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:7<\/strong> <em>a weak reed, swayed by every breath of wind:<\/em> An unstable person. The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is no.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:7 a weak reed, swayed by every breath of wind: An unstable person. The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is no.","summary_en":"11:7 a weak reed, swayed by every breath of wind: An unstable person. The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is no.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137575,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:7","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:7<\/strong> <em>a weak reed, swayed by every breath of wind:<\/em> An unstable person. The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is no.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:7<\/strong> <em>a weak reed, swayed by every breath of wind:<\/em> An unstable person. The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is no.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:7 a weak reed, swayed by every breath of wind: An unstable person. The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is no.","summary_en":"11:7 a weak reed, swayed by every breath of wind: An unstable person. The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is no.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":24053,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Malachi","title_en":"Book of Malachi","content_ro":"<h3>MALACHI, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Last prophetic book of the Jewish canon; last book of the Old Testament.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The name Malachi means “my messenger” or “messenger of the Lord.” Since the word appears in 3:1, some scholars think that it is not a proper name at all and does not provide the name of the author of the book. According to one ancient tradition, the “messenger” was Ezra, the priest responsible for the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. Yet it would be most unusual for the Jews to preserve a prophetic book without explicitly attaching to it the name of the author. All of the other major and minor prophets—including Obadiah—are named after a particular prophet. Moreover, “messenger of the Lord” would be a most appropriate name for a prophet (cf. 2 Chr 36:15-16; Hg 1:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>During the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>, the struggling Jewish community in Judah was greatly assisted by the return of Ezra and Nehemiah. In 458 <span>BC<\/span> Ezra was encouraged by King Artaxerxes of Persia to lead a group of exiles back to Jerusalem and to institute religious reform. About 13 years later, in 445 <span>BC<\/span>, a high-ranking government official named Nehemiah was allowed to go to Jerusalem to rebuild the city walls, a task he accomplished in 52 days (Neh 6:15). As governor, Nehemiah led the people in a financial reform that provided for the poor and encouraged tithing to support the priests and Levites (5:2-13; 10:35-39). Like Ezra, Nehemiah urged the people to keep the Sabbath and avoid intermarrying with pagan neighbors. After a 12-year term, Nehemiah returned to Persia and the spiritual condition of Judah deteriorated. Perhaps discouraged by their lack of political power, tithing became sporadic, the Sabbath was not kept, intermarriage was common, and even the priests could not be trusted. When Nehemiah came back to Jerusalem sometime later, he had to take firm action to straighten out the situation (13:6-31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Since Malachi had to deal with the same sins mentioned in Nehemiah 13 (see Mal 1:6-14; 2:14-16; 3:8-11), it is likely that the prophet ministered either during Nehemiah’s second term as governor or in the years just before his return. The reference to “the governor” in Malachi 1:8 implies that someone other than Nehemiah was in office, so it may be best to place Malachi just after 433 <span>BC<\/span>, the year Nehemiah had returned to Persia.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheology\">Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n<p>Malachi was written to shake the people of Judah from their spiritual lethargy and to warn them that judgment was coming unless they repented. The people doubted God’s love (1:2) and justice (2:17) and did not take his commands seriously (1:6; 3:14-18). Yet God was “a great King” (1:14) with a great name that was to be feared even beyond the border of Israel (vv 5, 11). Malachi repeatedly urged both the priests and the people to revere God and give him the honor he deserved. God was Israel’s Father and Creator (2:10), but the nation showed contempt for his name (1:6; 3:5). In response to this contempt, God would send his messenger to announce the Day of the Lord (3:1). John the Baptist did call the nation to repentance, and Christ came to cleanse the temple (Jn 2:14-15) and to establish the covenant (Mal 3:1-2). Most of the work of refining and purifying will take place at the Second Coming, when Christ returns to purify his people (cf. vv 2-4) and judge the wicked (4:1).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Great Love for Israel (1:1-5)<\/h5>\n<p>To introduce the book, Malachi presents a contrast between God’s love for Israel and his hatred for Edom. Yet the assertion of God’s love is greeted with a strange question: “How have you loved us?” God loved Israel by entering into a covenant with the nation at Mt Sinai, just after he had freed them from the prison of Egypt. He had chosen them as his special people (cf. Gn 12:1-3; Ex 19:5-6), whereas the descendants of Esau were not chosen (cf. Rom 9:10-13). Both Israel and Edom endured invasion and destruction, but only Israel was restored and rebuilt after the exile. The people of Edom were driven from their homeland by the Nabateans between 550 and 400 <span>BC<\/span>, and they never regained their territory. Through the judgment of Edom, God demonstrated that he is the great Ruler over the nations (Mal 1:5) and that he will not forget Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Unacceptable Sacrifices of the Priests (1:6-14)<\/h5>\n<p>Although God deserved the honor and reverence of the Israelites, both the people and the priests openly disdained his laws and regulations. Strangely, it was the priests who led the way into disobedience. Sacrifices and offerings were supposed to atone for sin, but the animals offered by the priests only served to pollute or defile the altar (1:7, 12). According to Leviticus, animals with defects were unacceptable as sacrifices, but Malachi mentions that the priests were offering to the Lord animals that were stolen and mutilated, crippled and sick (v 13; cf. v 8). To emphasize their contempt, the Lord challenged the priests to bring comparable presents to the governor. Would they dare to insult him in this fashion and face sure rejection? Rather than having the priests continue to bring unfit sacrifices to the altar, the Lord asked them to close the temple doors entirely (v 10). Going through the motions never pleased God, either in ancient times (cf. Is 1:12-13) or modern. By calling the altar and its sacrifices “contemptible” (Mal 1:7, 12), the priests were no better than the wicked sons of Eli, whose disregard of the rules for sacrifices sent them to a premature death (cf. 1 Sm 2:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>In sharp contrast to the attitude of the priests stands the emphasis upon God’s greatness in Malachi 1:11 and 14. God is more powerful than the gods of other nations, and even if Israel’s priests and people dishonor the Lord, eventually pure offerings will be brought to God by believing Gentiles. Perhaps these offerings refer to prayer and praise (cf. Ps 19:14; Heb 13:15; Rv 5:8), but others interpret the reference more literally (cf. Is 56:7; 60:7). Peter may be alluding to this verse in connection with the conversion of Cornelius (Acts 10:35).<\/p>\n<h5>The Punishment of the Priests (2:1-9)<\/h5>\n<p>One of the functions of the priests was to pronounce blessings upon the people in the name of God, but their disgraceful behavior turned the blessings into curses (Mal 2:2). Because of the priests’ sinfulness and the poor condition of the animals, their sacrifices were also worthless, and the entrails of the animals will be spread on their faces as a sign that God holds them in contempt. The disgrace heaped upon the priests differs sharply from the honor enjoyed by Aaron and his descendants. Malachi refers to a covenant of life and peace (v 5) made with Levi and more particularly with Aaron’s grandson Phinehas, who courageously took action against the Jews involved in idolatry and immorality (Nm 25:10-13). In those days the priests revered the Lord and turned many from sin (Mal 2:6).<\/p>\n<p>Another responsibility of the priests was to teach the nation the law handed down by Moses (cf. Lv 10:11). Like prophets, they were messengers of the Lord (Mal 2:7) who were supposed to walk close to the Lord, but now the priests disregarded the law and were dishonest in handing down judicial decisions (Mal 2:9; cf. Lv 19:15).<\/p>\n<h5>The Unfaithfulness of the People (2:10-16)<\/h5>\n<p>In light of the attitude of the priests, it is not surprising to discover that the people at large were unfaithful to the Lord. God had formed Israel to be his special people, but the people had broken faith with him. A major factor in their unfaithfulness was intermarriage with foreigners, a sin mentioned in Ezra 9:1-2 and Nehemiah 13:23-29. By marrying pagan women, the men of Israel invariably began to worship pagan gods and turn from the Lord. When such intermarriage occurred, it sometimes followed the divorce of an Israelite wife. In Malachi 2:14-15 God underscores the sacred commitment that he himself witnesses when two people marry. If that marriage covenant is shattered by divorce, God is deeply displeased. And it is even more tragic if divorce became an excuse to marry a more attractive or appealing foreigner.<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Messenger of the Covenant (2:17–3:5)<\/h5>\n<p>The sins of the priests and the people did not go unnoticed, even though the nation doubted that God would take action (2:17). But the third chapter opens with the announcement that the messenger of the covenant will indeed come to his temple. His way will be prepared by another messenger—a prophecy of John the Baptist, who prepared the way for the ministry of Christ (cf. Mt 11:10; Mk 1:2-3). When Christ came, he revealed his anger when he cleansed the temple (cf. Jn 2:13-17) and denounced the scribes and Pharisees (cf. 9:39), but most of his purifying and refining work awaits the Second Coming. Someday the priests and Levites will bring acceptable sacrifices, as they did in the days of Moses and Phinehas (cf. Mal 3:3-4 and 2:4-5). Verse 5 of chapter 3 broadens the scope of the judgment to include the whole nation, as sorcerers, adulterers, and those who oppress the poor are condemned.<\/p>\n<h5>The Benefits of Faithful Tithing (3:6-12)<\/h5>\n<p>Another specific weakness of postexilic Judah was the failure of the people to bring their tithes to the Lord. Encouraged by Nehemiah, the nation promised to tithe faithfully (cf. Neh 10:37-39), but apparently their good intentions were short-lived (cf. 13:10-11). According to Malachi 3:8-9, the tithes of the nation were so dismal that the people were, in effect, robbing God and were therefore under a curse. In verses 10-12 Malachi challenges the nation to bring their tithes; then God would pour out his blessing upon them. Just as the opening of the “windows in heaven” meant the end of a famine in 2 Kings 7:2, 19, so God promises that their crops will be so abundant that they will run out of storage space. The hope of “blessing” in Malachi 3:10 and 12 provides welcome relief from the curses mentioned in 1:14, 2:2, 3:9, and 4:6.<\/p>\n<h5>The Day of the Lord (3:13–4:6)<\/h5>\n<p>Faced with the challenge of Malachi 3:10-12, the people of Israel responded in two different ways. One group denied that serving God brought any benefit (3:13-15), while another segment of the nation bowed low before him with deep reverence (vv 16-18). The unbelievers argued that obeying the Lord was useless and that arrogant and evil people were the ones who prospered. In response to their charge, Malachi noted that God would remember who the righteous were in the Day of Judgment. Although all of Israel was included in the promise made to Abraham, only those who genuinely believed would be God’s treasured possession (3:17; cf. Ex 19:5), with their names written in the Book of Life (cf. Mal 3:16). As for the arrogant and evildoers, the Day of the Lord will consume them and they will have no survivors (4:1). Those who revere the Lord will enjoy spiritual and physical health under the blessing and protection of God, who is called the “sun of righteousness” (v 2). Like calves just released from confinement, the righteous will trample down the wicked and triumph over them (v 3).<\/p>\n<p>In view of the judgment associated with the Day of the Lord, Malachi urged the people to repent. To do this they needed to heed the law of Moses and take seriously the decrees and commands given at Mt Sinai (4:4; cf. 3:7). Just as Elijah called on Israel to turn back to God, so a new “Elijah” will preach repentance to a rebellious nation. When John the Baptist prepared the way for Christ (cf. Mal 3:1), he ministered “in the spirit and power of Elijah” and begged the Jews to turn from their sin and humble themselves before God (Lk 1:17). If they refused to listen, the nation faced the prospect of total destruction, the curse placed upon the people of Canaan (cf. Jos 6:17-19) and upon the nation of Edom, whose collapse was described in Malachi 1:2-5.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Postexilic Period; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MALACHI, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Last prophetic book of the Jewish canon; last book of the Old Testament.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The name Malachi means “my messenger” or “messenger of the Lord.” Since the word appears in 3:1, some scholars think that it is not a proper name at all and does not provide the name of the author of the book. According to one ancient tradition, the “messenger” was Ezra, the priest responsible for the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. Yet it would be most unusual for the Jews to preserve a prophetic book without explicitly attaching to it the name of the author. All of the other major and minor prophets—including Obadiah—are named after a particular prophet. Moreover, “messenger of the Lord” would be a most appropriate name for a prophet (cf. 2 Chr 36:15-16; Hg 1:13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>During the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>, the struggling Jewish community in Judah was greatly assisted by the return of Ezra and Nehemiah. In 458 <span>BC<\/span> Ezra was encouraged by King Artaxerxes of Persia to lead a group of exiles back to Jerusalem and to institute religious reform. About 13 years later, in 445 <span>BC<\/span>, a high-ranking government official named Nehemiah was allowed to go to Jerusalem to rebuild the city walls, a task he accomplished in 52 days (Neh 6:15). As governor, Nehemiah led the people in a financial reform that provided for the poor and encouraged tithing to support the priests and Levites (5:2-13; 10:35-39). Like Ezra, Nehemiah urged the people to keep the Sabbath and avoid intermarrying with pagan neighbors. After a 12-year term, Nehemiah returned to Persia and the spiritual condition of Judah deteriorated. Perhaps discouraged by their lack of political power, tithing became sporadic, the Sabbath was not kept, intermarriage was common, and even the priests could not be trusted. When Nehemiah came back to Jerusalem sometime later, he had to take firm action to straighten out the situation (13:6-31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>Since Malachi had to deal with the same sins mentioned in Nehemiah 13 (see Mal 1:6-14; 2:14-16; 3:8-11), it is likely that the prophet ministered either during Nehemiah’s second term as governor or in the years just before his return. The reference to “the governor” in Malachi 1:8 implies that someone other than Nehemiah was in office, so it may be best to place Malachi just after 433 <span>BC<\/span>, the year Nehemiah had returned to Persia.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheology\">Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n<p>Malachi was written to shake the people of Judah from their spiritual lethargy and to warn them that judgment was coming unless they repented. The people doubted God’s love (1:2) and justice (2:17) and did not take his commands seriously (1:6; 3:14-18). Yet God was “a great King” (1:14) with a great name that was to be feared even beyond the border of Israel (vv 5, 11). Malachi repeatedly urged both the priests and the people to revere God and give him the honor he deserved. God was Israel’s Father and Creator (2:10), but the nation showed contempt for his name (1:6; 3:5). In response to this contempt, God would send his messenger to announce the Day of the Lord (3:1). John the Baptist did call the nation to repentance, and Christ came to cleanse the temple (Jn 2:14-15) and to establish the covenant (Mal 3:1-2). Most of the work of refining and purifying will take place at the Second Coming, when Christ returns to purify his people (cf. vv 2-4) and judge the wicked (4:1).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Great Love for Israel (1:1-5)<\/h5>\n<p>To introduce the book, Malachi presents a contrast between God’s love for Israel and his hatred for Edom. Yet the assertion of God’s love is greeted with a strange question: “How have you loved us?” God loved Israel by entering into a covenant with the nation at Mt Sinai, just after he had freed them from the prison of Egypt. He had chosen them as his special people (cf. Gn 12:1-3; Ex 19:5-6), whereas the descendants of Esau were not chosen (cf. Rom 9:10-13). Both Israel and Edom endured invasion and destruction, but only Israel was restored and rebuilt after the exile. The people of Edom were driven from their homeland by the Nabateans between 550 and 400 <span>BC<\/span>, and they never regained their territory. Through the judgment of Edom, God demonstrated that he is the great Ruler over the nations (Mal 1:5) and that he will not forget Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Unacceptable Sacrifices of the Priests (1:6-14)<\/h5>\n<p>Although God deserved the honor and reverence of the Israelites, both the people and the priests openly disdained his laws and regulations. Strangely, it was the priests who led the way into disobedience. Sacrifices and offerings were supposed to atone for sin, but the animals offered by the priests only served to pollute or defile the altar (1:7, 12). According to Leviticus, animals with defects were unacceptable as sacrifices, but Malachi mentions that the priests were offering to the Lord animals that were stolen and mutilated, crippled and sick (v 13; cf. v 8). To emphasize their contempt, the Lord challenged the priests to bring comparable presents to the governor. Would they dare to insult him in this fashion and face sure rejection? Rather than having the priests continue to bring unfit sacrifices to the altar, the Lord asked them to close the temple doors entirely (v 10). Going through the motions never pleased God, either in ancient times (cf. Is 1:12-13) or modern. By calling the altar and its sacrifices “contemptible” (Mal 1:7, 12), the priests were no better than the wicked sons of Eli, whose disregard of the rules for sacrifices sent them to a premature death (cf. 1 Sm 2:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>In sharp contrast to the attitude of the priests stands the emphasis upon God’s greatness in Malachi 1:11 and 14. God is more powerful than the gods of other nations, and even if Israel’s priests and people dishonor the Lord, eventually pure offerings will be brought to God by believing Gentiles. Perhaps these offerings refer to prayer and praise (cf. Ps 19:14; Heb 13:15; Rv 5:8), but others interpret the reference more literally (cf. Is 56:7; 60:7). Peter may be alluding to this verse in connection with the conversion of Cornelius (Acts 10:35).<\/p>\n<h5>The Punishment of the Priests (2:1-9)<\/h5>\n<p>One of the functions of the priests was to pronounce blessings upon the people in the name of God, but their disgraceful behavior turned the blessings into curses (Mal 2:2). Because of the priests’ sinfulness and the poor condition of the animals, their sacrifices were also worthless, and the entrails of the animals will be spread on their faces as a sign that God holds them in contempt. The disgrace heaped upon the priests differs sharply from the honor enjoyed by Aaron and his descendants. Malachi refers to a covenant of life and peace (v 5) made with Levi and more particularly with Aaron’s grandson Phinehas, who courageously took action against the Jews involved in idolatry and immorality (Nm 25:10-13). In those days the priests revered the Lord and turned many from sin (Mal 2:6).<\/p>\n<p>Another responsibility of the priests was to teach the nation the law handed down by Moses (cf. Lv 10:11). Like prophets, they were messengers of the Lord (Mal 2:7) who were supposed to walk close to the Lord, but now the priests disregarded the law and were dishonest in handing down judicial decisions (Mal 2:9; cf. Lv 19:15).<\/p>\n<h5>The Unfaithfulness of the People (2:10-16)<\/h5>\n<p>In light of the attitude of the priests, it is not surprising to discover that the people at large were unfaithful to the Lord. God had formed Israel to be his special people, but the people had broken faith with him. A major factor in their unfaithfulness was intermarriage with foreigners, a sin mentioned in Ezra 9:1-2 and Nehemiah 13:23-29. By marrying pagan women, the men of Israel invariably began to worship pagan gods and turn from the Lord. When such intermarriage occurred, it sometimes followed the divorce of an Israelite wife. In Malachi 2:14-15 God underscores the sacred commitment that he himself witnesses when two people marry. If that marriage covenant is shattered by divorce, God is deeply displeased. And it is even more tragic if divorce became an excuse to marry a more attractive or appealing foreigner.<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Messenger of the Covenant (2:17–3:5)<\/h5>\n<p>The sins of the priests and the people did not go unnoticed, even though the nation doubted that God would take action (2:17). But the third chapter opens with the announcement that the messenger of the covenant will indeed come to his temple. His way will be prepared by another messenger—a prophecy of John the Baptist, who prepared the way for the ministry of Christ (cf. Mt 11:10; Mk 1:2-3). When Christ came, he revealed his anger when he cleansed the temple (cf. Jn 2:13-17) and denounced the scribes and Pharisees (cf. 9:39), but most of his purifying and refining work awaits the Second Coming. Someday the priests and Levites will bring acceptable sacrifices, as they did in the days of Moses and Phinehas (cf. Mal 3:3-4 and 2:4-5). Verse 5 of chapter 3 broadens the scope of the judgment to include the whole nation, as sorcerers, adulterers, and those who oppress the poor are condemned.<\/p>\n<h5>The Benefits of Faithful Tithing (3:6-12)<\/h5>\n<p>Another specific weakness of postexilic Judah was the failure of the people to bring their tithes to the Lord. Encouraged by Nehemiah, the nation promised to tithe faithfully (cf. Neh 10:37-39), but apparently their good intentions were short-lived (cf. 13:10-11). According to Malachi 3:8-9, the tithes of the nation were so dismal that the people were, in effect, robbing God and were therefore under a curse. In verses 10-12 Malachi challenges the nation to bring their tithes; then God would pour out his blessing upon them. Just as the opening of the “windows in heaven” meant the end of a famine in 2 Kings 7:2, 19, so God promises that their crops will be so abundant that they will run out of storage space. The hope of “blessing” in Malachi 3:10 and 12 provides welcome relief from the curses mentioned in 1:14, 2:2, 3:9, and 4:6.<\/p>\n<h5>The Day of the Lord (3:13–4:6)<\/h5>\n<p>Faced with the challenge of Malachi 3:10-12, the people of Israel responded in two different ways. One group denied that serving God brought any benefit (3:13-15), while another segment of the nation bowed low before him with deep reverence (vv 16-18). The unbelievers argued that obeying the Lord was useless and that arrogant and evil people were the ones who prospered. In response to their charge, Malachi noted that God would remember who the righteous were in the Day of Judgment. Although all of Israel was included in the promise made to Abraham, only those who genuinely believed would be God’s treasured possession (3:17; cf. Ex 19:5), with their names written in the Book of Life (cf. Mal 3:16). As for the arrogant and evildoers, the Day of the Lord will consume them and they will have no survivors (4:1). Those who revere the Lord will enjoy spiritual and physical health under the blessing and protection of God, who is called the “sun of righteousness” (v 2). Like calves just released from confinement, the righteous will trample down the wicked and triumph over them (v 3).<\/p>\n<p>In view of the judgment associated with the Day of the Lord, Malachi urged the people to repent. To do this they needed to heed the law of Moses and take seriously the decrees and commands given at Mt Sinai (4:4; cf. 3:7). Just as Elijah called on Israel to turn back to God, so a new “Elijah” will preach repentance to a rebellious nation. When John the Baptist prepared the way for Christ (cf. Mal 3:1), he ministered “in the spirit and power of Elijah” and begged the Jews to turn from their sin and humble themselves before God (Lk 1:17). If they refused to listen, the nation faced the prospect of total destruction, the curse placed upon the people of Canaan (cf. Jos 6:17-19) and upon the nation of Edom, whose collapse was described in Malachi 1:2-5.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Israel, History of; Postexilic Period; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MALACHI, Book of Last prophetic book of the Jewish canon; last book of the Old Testament. Preview • Author • Background • Date • Purpose and Theology • Content Author The name Malachi means “my messenger” or “messenger of the Lord.” Since the word appears in 3:1, some scholars think that it is not a proper name at all and does not provide the name of the author of the book. According to one ancient tradition, the “messenger” was Ezra, the priest responsible for the books of Ezra and Nehemiah....","summary_en":"MALACHI, Book of Last prophetic book of the Jewish canon; last book of the Old Testament. Preview • Author • Background • Date • Purpose and Theology • Content Author The name Malachi means “my messenger” or “messenger of the Lord.” Since the word appears in 3:1, some scholars think that it is not a proper name at all and does not provide the name of the author of the book. According to one ancient tradition, the “messenger” was Ezra, the priest responsible for the books of Ezra and Nehemiah....","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":25359,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Messenger","title_en":"Messenger","content_ro":"<h3>MESSENGER<\/h3>\n<p>One who carries a message, a herald. The word “messenger” is used in the Bible in four ways.<\/p>\n<li>1. The word is used of messengers carrying messages from one person to another. Such messengers might bring news (2 Sm 11:22), requests or demands (1 Sm 11:3; 16:19), or act as envoys of one nation to another (Is 37:9). In the NT we read of messengers of the churches (2 Cor 8:23; Phil 2:25). The blessing of a good messenger is spoken of in Proverbs 25:13: “Faithful messengers are as refreshing as snow in the heat of summer. They revive the spirit of their employer” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/li>\n<li>2. The word is used of messengers bringing messages from God. Israel was intended to be God’s messenger but often showed herself blind and deaf (Is 42:19). Prophets (Hg 1:13) and priests (Mal 2:7) were God’s messengers. God sent many such messengers to his people, even though they were often unheeded (2 Chr 36:15-16). In Malachi 3:1 we have the prophecy of a special messenger, “Look! I am sending my messenger, and he will prepare the way before me. Then the Lord you are seeking will suddenly come to his Temple. The messenger of the covenant, whom you look for so eagerly, is surely coming” (<span>nlt<\/span>). This verse is quoted in the NT in Matthew 11:10, Mark 1:2, and Luke 7:27 as fulfilled in John the Baptist.<\/li>\n<li>3. In both the OT and NT the most common word for “messenger” is also that for “angel.” God’s angels are distinctively his messengers. <em>See<\/em> Angel.<\/li>\n<li>4. The word is used in a metaphorical sense, as in Proverbs 16:14, “The wrath of a king is as messengers of death” (<span>kjv<\/span>), and in 2 Corinthians 12:7, where Paul’s constant physical ailment is called “a messenger from Satan to torment” him.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>MESSENGER<\/h3>\n<p>One who carries a message, a herald. The word “messenger” is used in the Bible in four ways.<\/p>\n<li>1. The word is used of messengers carrying messages from one person to another. Such messengers might bring news (2 Sm 11:22), requests or demands (1 Sm 11:3; 16:19), or act as envoys of one nation to another (Is 37:9). In the NT we read of messengers of the churches (2 Cor 8:23; Phil 2:25). The blessing of a good messenger is spoken of in Proverbs 25:13: “Faithful messengers are as refreshing as snow in the heat of summer. They revive the spirit of their employer” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/li>\n<li>2. The word is used of messengers bringing messages from God. Israel was intended to be God’s messenger but often showed herself blind and deaf (Is 42:19). Prophets (Hg 1:13) and priests (Mal 2:7) were God’s messengers. God sent many such messengers to his people, even though they were often unheeded (2 Chr 36:15-16). In Malachi 3:1 we have the prophecy of a special messenger, “Look! I am sending my messenger, and he will prepare the way before me. Then the Lord you are seeking will suddenly come to his Temple. The messenger of the covenant, whom you look for so eagerly, is surely coming” (<span>nlt<\/span>). This verse is quoted in the NT in Matthew 11:10, Mark 1:2, and Luke 7:27 as fulfilled in John the Baptist.<\/li>\n<li>3. In both the OT and NT the most common word for “messenger” is also that for “angel.” God’s angels are distinctively his messengers. <em>See<\/em> Angel.<\/li>\n<li>4. The word is used in a metaphorical sense, as in Proverbs 16:14, “The wrath of a king is as messengers of death” (<span>kjv<\/span>), and in 2 Corinthians 12:7, where Paul’s constant physical ailment is called “a messenger from Satan to torment” him.<\/li>","summary_ro":"MESSENGER One who carries a message, a herald. The word “messenger” is used in the Bible in four ways. 1. The word is used of messengers carrying messages from one person to another. Such messengers might bring news (2 Sm 11:22), requests or demands (1 Sm 11:3; 16:19), or act as envoys of one nation to another (Is 37:9). In the NT we read of messengers of the churches (2 Cor 8:23; Phil 2:25). The blessing of a good messenger is spoken of in Proverbs 25:13: “Faithful messengers are as refreshi...","summary_en":"MESSENGER One who carries a message, a herald. The word “messenger” is used in the Bible in four ways. 1. The word is used of messengers carrying messages from one person to another. Such messengers might bring news (2 Sm 11:22), requests or demands (1 Sm 11:3; 16:19), or act as envoys of one nation to another (Is 37:9). In the NT we read of messengers of the churches (2 Cor 8:23; Phil 2:25). The blessing of a good messenger is spoken of in Proverbs 25:13: “Faithful messengers are as refreshi...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"11":[{"id":20395,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","summary_en":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54698,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:11","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:11<\/strong> <em>John the Baptist<\/em> was the greatest person ever to have lived. Yet <em>the least<\/em> of Jesus’ followers are <em>greater<\/em> than John because they live in the new covenant of salvation through Christ (see 4:17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:11<\/strong> <em>John the Baptist<\/em> was the greatest person ever to have lived. Yet <em>the least<\/em> of Jesus’ followers are <em>greater<\/em> than John because they live in the new covenant of salvation through Christ (see 4:17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:11 John the Baptist was the greatest person ever to have lived. Yet the least of Jesus’ followers are greater than John because they live in the new covenant of salvation through Christ (see 4:17).","summary_en":"11:11 John the Baptist was the greatest person ever to have lived. Yet the least of Jesus’ followers are greater than John because they live in the new covenant of salvation through Christ (see 4:17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82324,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:11","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:11<\/strong> <em>John the Baptist<\/em> was the greatest person ever to have lived. Yet <em>the least<\/em> of Jesus’ followers are <em>greater<\/em> than John because they live in the new covenant of salvation through Christ (see 4:17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:11<\/strong> <em>John the Baptist<\/em> was the greatest person ever to have lived. Yet <em>the least<\/em> of Jesus’ followers are <em>greater<\/em> than John because they live in the new covenant of salvation through Christ (see 4:17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:11 John the Baptist was the greatest person ever to have lived. Yet the least of Jesus’ followers are greater than John because they live in the new covenant of salvation through Christ (see 4:17).","summary_en":"11:11 John the Baptist was the greatest person ever to have lived. Yet the least of Jesus’ followers are greater than John because they live in the new covenant of salvation through Christ (see 4:17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":109950,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:11","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:11<\/strong> <em>John the Baptist<\/em> was the greatest person ever to have lived. Yet <em>the least<\/em> of Jesus’ followers are <em>greater<\/em> than John because they live in the new covenant of salvation through Christ (see 4:17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:11<\/strong> <em>John the Baptist<\/em> was the greatest person ever to have lived. Yet <em>the least<\/em> of Jesus’ followers are <em>greater<\/em> than John because they live in the new covenant of salvation through Christ (see 4:17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:11 John the Baptist was the greatest person ever to have lived. Yet the least of Jesus’ followers are greater than John because they live in the new covenant of salvation through Christ (see 4:17).","summary_en":"11:11 John the Baptist was the greatest person ever to have lived. Yet the least of Jesus’ followers are greater than John because they live in the new covenant of salvation through Christ (see 4:17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137576,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:11","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:11<\/strong> <em>John the Baptist<\/em> was the greatest person ever to have lived. Yet <em>the least<\/em> of Jesus’ followers are <em>greater<\/em> than John because they live in the new covenant of salvation through Christ (see 4:17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:11<\/strong> <em>John the Baptist<\/em> was the greatest person ever to have lived. Yet <em>the least<\/em> of Jesus’ followers are <em>greater<\/em> than John because they live in the new covenant of salvation through Christ (see 4:17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:11 John the Baptist was the greatest person ever to have lived. Yet the least of Jesus’ followers are greater than John because they live in the new covenant of salvation through Christ (see 4:17).","summary_en":"11:11 John the Baptist was the greatest person ever to have lived. Yet the least of Jesus’ followers are greater than John because they live in the new covenant of salvation through Christ (see 4:17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":19631,"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":54699,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:12","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:12<\/strong> <em>the Kingdom of Heaven has been forcefully advancing:<\/em> Or <em>the Kingdom of Heaven has suffered from violence.<\/em> These alternatives reflect either a positive or negative nuance of the Greek verb. In Luke 16:16, a different verb (“preached”) makes it a clearly positive statement. • <em>violent people are attacking it:<\/em> This phrase may also have a positive or negative sense. If negative, it might refer to those who imprisoned John (see Matt 11:2; 14:1-12), and <em>attacking<\/em> might mean either that they were trying to attack the Kingdom but were unable to thwart God’s sovereign plans, or that they were attacking it by persecuting its members. In Luke 16:16 this statement has the positive sense that they were “eager to get in” and were forcefully laying claim to the Kingdom through radical trust and obedience.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:12<\/strong> <em>the Kingdom of Heaven has been forcefully advancing:<\/em> Or <em>the Kingdom of Heaven has suffered from violence.<\/em> These alternatives reflect either a positive or negative nuance of the Greek verb. In Luke 16:16, a different verb (“preached”) makes it a clearly positive statement. • <em>violent people are attacking it:<\/em> This phrase may also have a positive or negative sense. If negative, it might refer to those who imprisoned John (see Matt 11:2; 14:1-12), and <em>attacking<\/em> might mean either that they were trying to attack the Kingdom but were unable to thwart God’s sovereign plans, or that they were attacking it by persecuting its members. In Luke 16:16 this statement has the positive sense that they were “eager to get in” and were forcefully laying claim to the Kingdom through radical trust and obedience.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:12 the Kingdom of Heaven has been forcefully advancing: Or the Kingdom of Heaven has suffered from violence. These alternatives reflect either a positive or negative nuance of the Greek verb. In Luke 16:16, a different verb (“preached”) makes it a clearly positive statement. • violent people are attacking it: This phrase may also have a positive or negative sense. If negative, it might refer to those who imprisoned John (see Matt 11:2; 14:1-12), and attacking might mean either that they we...","summary_en":"11:12 the Kingdom of Heaven has been forcefully advancing: Or the Kingdom of Heaven has suffered from violence. These alternatives reflect either a positive or negative nuance of the Greek verb. In Luke 16:16, a different verb (“preached”) makes it a clearly positive statement. • violent people are attacking it: This phrase may also have a positive or negative sense. If negative, it might refer to those who imprisoned John (see Matt 11:2; 14:1-12), and attacking might mean either that they we...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82325,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:12","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:12<\/strong> <em>the Kingdom of Heaven has been forcefully advancing:<\/em> Or <em>the Kingdom of Heaven has suffered from violence.<\/em> These alternatives reflect either a positive or negative nuance of the Greek verb. In Luke 16:16, a different verb (“preached”) makes it a clearly positive statement. • <em>violent people are attacking it:<\/em> This phrase may also have a positive or negative sense. If negative, it might refer to those who imprisoned John (see Matt 11:2; 14:1-12), and <em>attacking<\/em> might mean either that they were trying to attack the Kingdom but were unable to thwart God’s sovereign plans, or that they were attacking it by persecuting its members. In Luke 16:16 this statement has the positive sense that they were “eager to get in” and were forcefully laying claim to the Kingdom through radical trust and obedience.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:12<\/strong> <em>the Kingdom of Heaven has been forcefully advancing:<\/em> Or <em>the Kingdom of Heaven has suffered from violence.<\/em> These alternatives reflect either a positive or negative nuance of the Greek verb. In Luke 16:16, a different verb (“preached”) makes it a clearly positive statement. • <em>violent people are attacking it:<\/em> This phrase may also have a positive or negative sense. If negative, it might refer to those who imprisoned John (see Matt 11:2; 14:1-12), and <em>attacking<\/em> might mean either that they were trying to attack the Kingdom but were unable to thwart God’s sovereign plans, or that they were attacking it by persecuting its members. In Luke 16:16 this statement has the positive sense that they were “eager to get in” and were forcefully laying claim to the Kingdom through radical trust and obedience.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:12 the Kingdom of Heaven has been forcefully advancing: Or the Kingdom of Heaven has suffered from violence. These alternatives reflect either a positive or negative nuance of the Greek verb. In Luke 16:16, a different verb (“preached”) makes it a clearly positive statement. • violent people are attacking it: This phrase may also have a positive or negative sense. If negative, it might refer to those who imprisoned John (see Matt 11:2; 14:1-12), and attacking might mean either that they we...","summary_en":"11:12 the Kingdom of Heaven has been forcefully advancing: Or the Kingdom of Heaven has suffered from violence. These alternatives reflect either a positive or negative nuance of the Greek verb. In Luke 16:16, a different verb (“preached”) makes it a clearly positive statement. • violent people are attacking it: This phrase may also have a positive or negative sense. If negative, it might refer to those who imprisoned John (see Matt 11:2; 14:1-12), and attacking might mean either that they we...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":109951,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:12","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:12<\/strong> <em>the Kingdom of Heaven has been forcefully advancing:<\/em> Or <em>the Kingdom of Heaven has suffered from violence.<\/em> These alternatives reflect either a positive or negative nuance of the Greek verb. In Luke 16:16, a different verb (“preached”) makes it a clearly positive statement. • <em>violent people are attacking it:<\/em> This phrase may also have a positive or negative sense. If negative, it might refer to those who imprisoned John (see Matt 11:2; 14:1-12), and <em>attacking<\/em> might mean either that they were trying to attack the Kingdom but were unable to thwart God’s sovereign plans, or that they were attacking it by persecuting its members. In Luke 16:16 this statement has the positive sense that they were “eager to get in” and were forcefully laying claim to the Kingdom through radical trust and obedience.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:12<\/strong> <em>the Kingdom of Heaven has been forcefully advancing:<\/em> Or <em>the Kingdom of Heaven has suffered from violence.<\/em> These alternatives reflect either a positive or negative nuance of the Greek verb. In Luke 16:16, a different verb (“preached”) makes it a clearly positive statement. • <em>violent people are attacking it:<\/em> This phrase may also have a positive or negative sense. If negative, it might refer to those who imprisoned John (see Matt 11:2; 14:1-12), and <em>attacking<\/em> might mean either that they were trying to attack the Kingdom but were unable to thwart God’s sovereign plans, or that they were attacking it by persecuting its members. In Luke 16:16 this statement has the positive sense that they were “eager to get in” and were forcefully laying claim to the Kingdom through radical trust and obedience.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:12 the Kingdom of Heaven has been forcefully advancing: Or the Kingdom of Heaven has suffered from violence. These alternatives reflect either a positive or negative nuance of the Greek verb. In Luke 16:16, a different verb (“preached”) makes it a clearly positive statement. • violent people are attacking it: This phrase may also have a positive or negative sense. If negative, it might refer to those who imprisoned John (see Matt 11:2; 14:1-12), and attacking might mean either that they we...","summary_en":"11:12 the Kingdom of Heaven has been forcefully advancing: Or the Kingdom of Heaven has suffered from violence. These alternatives reflect either a positive or negative nuance of the Greek verb. In Luke 16:16, a different verb (“preached”) makes it a clearly positive statement. • violent people are attacking it: This phrase may also have a positive or negative sense. If negative, it might refer to those who imprisoned John (see Matt 11:2; 14:1-12), and attacking might mean either that they we...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137577,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:12","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:12<\/strong> <em>the Kingdom of Heaven has been forcefully advancing:<\/em> Or <em>the Kingdom of Heaven has suffered from violence.<\/em> These alternatives reflect either a positive or negative nuance of the Greek verb. In Luke 16:16, a different verb (“preached”) makes it a clearly positive statement. • <em>violent people are attacking it:<\/em> This phrase may also have a positive or negative sense. If negative, it might refer to those who imprisoned John (see Matt 11:2; 14:1-12), and <em>attacking<\/em> might mean either that they were trying to attack the Kingdom but were unable to thwart God’s sovereign plans, or that they were attacking it by persecuting its members. In Luke 16:16 this statement has the positive sense that they were “eager to get in” and were forcefully laying claim to the Kingdom through radical trust and obedience.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:12<\/strong> <em>the Kingdom of Heaven has been forcefully advancing:<\/em> Or <em>the Kingdom of Heaven has suffered from violence.<\/em> These alternatives reflect either a positive or negative nuance of the Greek verb. In Luke 16:16, a different verb (“preached”) makes it a clearly positive statement. • <em>violent people are attacking it:<\/em> This phrase may also have a positive or negative sense. If negative, it might refer to those who imprisoned John (see Matt 11:2; 14:1-12), and <em>attacking<\/em> might mean either that they were trying to attack the Kingdom but were unable to thwart God’s sovereign plans, or that they were attacking it by persecuting its members. In Luke 16:16 this statement has the positive sense that they were “eager to get in” and were forcefully laying claim to the Kingdom through radical trust and obedience.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:12 the Kingdom of Heaven has been forcefully advancing: Or the Kingdom of Heaven has suffered from violence. These alternatives reflect either a positive or negative nuance of the Greek verb. In Luke 16:16, a different verb (“preached”) makes it a clearly positive statement. • violent people are attacking it: This phrase may also have a positive or negative sense. If negative, it might refer to those who imprisoned John (see Matt 11:2; 14:1-12), and attacking might mean either that they we...","summary_en":"11:12 the Kingdom of Heaven has been forcefully advancing: Or the Kingdom of Heaven has suffered from violence. These alternatives reflect either a positive or negative nuance of the Greek verb. In Luke 16:16, a different verb (“preached”) makes it a clearly positive statement. • violent people are attacking it: This phrase may also have a positive or negative sense. If negative, it might refer to those who imprisoned John (see Matt 11:2; 14:1-12), and attacking might mean either that they we...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"13":[{"id":20393,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","summary_en":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31576,"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}],"14":[{"id":41573,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Elijah","title_en":"Elijah","content_ro":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","summary_en":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42386,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69199,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Elijah","title_en":"Elijah","content_ro":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","summary_en":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70012,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":96825,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Elijah","title_en":"Elijah","content_ro":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","summary_en":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97638,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124451,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Elijah","title_en":"Elijah","content_ro":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","summary_en":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125264,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":6313,"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":10585,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Elijah","title_en":"Elijah","content_ro":"<h3>ELIJAH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Ninth-century <span>BC<\/span> prophet of Israel. Elijah’s name means “my God is the Lord”—appropriate for a stalwart opponent of Baal worship. The Scriptures give no information regarding his family background except that he was a Tishbite who probably came from the land of Gilead on the east bank of the Jordan River. He lived primarily during the reigns of kings Ahab (874–853 <span>BC<\/span>) and Ahaziah (853–852 <span>BC<\/span>) of Israel. The biblical account of Elijah runs from 1 Kings 17 to 2 Kings 2.<\/li>\n<p>Elijah was called by God at a critical period in Israel’s life. Economically and politically the northern kingdom was in its strongest position since its separation from the southern kingdom. Omri (885–874 <span>BC<\/span>) had initiated a policy of trade and friendly relations with the Phoenicians. To show his good faith, Omri gave his son Ahab in marriage to Jezebel, the daughter of Ethbaal, king of Tyre. She brought Baal worship with her to Israel, a false religion whose rapid spread soon threatened the kingdom’s very existence. Elijah was sent to turn the nation and its leaders back to the Lord through his prophetic message and miracles.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WarningofDrought\">Warning of Drought<\/p>\n<p>Elijah began his recorded ministry by telling Ahab that the nation would suffer a drought until the prophet himself announced its end (1 Kgs 17:1). He thus repeated Moses’ warning (Lv 26:14-39; Dt 28:15-68) of the consequences of turning away from God.<\/p>\n<p>Elijah then hid himself in a ravine on the east bank of the Jordan River by the brook Cherith (possibly the valley of the Yarmuk River in north Gilead). There he had sufficient water for his needs, and ravens brought him food twice daily. When the brook dried up, Elijah was directed to move to the Phoenician village of Zarephath near Sidon. A widow took care of him from her scanty supplies, and her obedience to Elijah was rewarded by a miraculous supply of meal and oil that was not depleted until the drought ended.<\/p>\n<p>While Elijah was staying with the widow, her son became ill and died. By the power of prayer, the child was restored to life and good health.<\/p>\n<p>In the drought’s third year the Lord told Elijah to inform Ahab that God would soon provide rain for Israel. On his return, Elijah first encountered Ahab’s officer, Obadiah, who was searching for water for the king’s livestock. Elijah sent Obadiah to arrange a meeting with Ahab. At first Obadiah refused. For three years Ahab had searched Israel and the neighboring kingdoms in vain for the prophet, no doubt in order to force him to end the drought. Obadiah was certain that while he went to bring Ahab, Israel’s most wanted “outlaw” would elude them again, thus enraging the king. When Elijah promised him that he would stay until he returned, the officer arranged for Ahab to meet the prophet.<\/p>\n<p>In the subsequent meeting Elijah rejected the king’s allegation that he was the “troubler of Israel” (1 Kgs 18:17-18). He was only obeying God, he insisted, in pointing out Ahab’s idolatry. Ahab had even permitted Jezebel to subsidize a school of Baal and Asherah prophets. Elijah then requested a public gathering on Mt Carmel as a contest between the prophets of Baal and the prophets of the Lord to determine who was the true God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ConfrontationonCarmel\">Confrontation on Carmel<\/p>\n<p>One of the highlights of Elijah’s ministry was the contest on Mt Carmel. Ahab assembled all Israel along with 850 prophets of Baal and Asherah. The famous challenge was issued: “How long are you going to waver between two opinions? If the <span>Lord<\/span> is God, follow him! But if Baal is God, then follow him!” (1 Kgs 18:21, <span>nlt<\/span>). Sacrificial animals were to be placed on two altars, one for Baal and one for the Lord, and the prophets representing each were to ask for fire from their God.<\/p>\n<p>All day long the pagan prophets called in vain on Baal. They danced a whirling, frenzied dance, cutting themselves with knives until their blood gushed. But there was no answer. Finally, Elijah’s turn came. He repaired the demolished altar of the Lord and prepared the sacrifice. For dramatic effect, he built a trench around the altar and poured water over the sacrifice until the trench overflowed. Then he said a brief prayer, and immediately fire fell from heaven and consumed the burnt offering, the wood, the stones, and the dust, and licked up the water that was in the trench (1 Kgs 18:38).<\/p>\n<p>When the people saw it, they fell on their faces in repentance, chanting, “The <span>Lord<\/span> is God! The <span>Lord<\/span> is God!” (1 Kgs 18:39). At Elijah’s command the people seized the prophets of Baal and killed them by the brook Kishon. Then Elijah, at the top of Carmel, began to pray fervently for rain. Dramatically, the sky became black with clouds and rain began to pour, ending the long drought. Ahab rode back in his chariot to Jezreel, 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) to the east. God’s Spirit enabled Elijah to outrun Ahab, and he arrived in Jezreel first.<\/p>\n<p>Jezebel, furious over the massacre of the Baal prophets, sent a message to Elijah: “May the gods also kill me if by this time tomorrow I have failed to take your life like those whom you killed” (1 Kgs 19:2, <span>nlt<\/span>). When Elijah received her message, he panicked and fled to Beersheba.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExperienceatHoreb\">Experience at Horeb<\/p>\n<p>Elijah left his servant in Beersheba, going another day’s journey into the desert alone. There he lay down under a broom tree and, in despair and exhaustion, asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel appeared, nourishing him twice with bread and water. After he had slept, Elijah continued on his way.<\/p>\n\n<p>After 40 days, Elijah arrived at Mt Horeb, where he found shelter in a cave. There the Lord spoke to him, asking what he was doing there. The prophet explained that he was the only prophet of God left in Israel, and now even his life was threatened. In response, the mighty forces of nature—a great wind, an earthquake, and fire—were displayed before Elijah to show him that the omnipotent God could intercede on his behalf with a powerful hand. Finally God encouraged Elijah in a “still, small voice.” The Lord had further tasks for him to accomplish. God also told Elijah that he was not the only faithful person in Israel; 7,000 others remained true to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Since Elijah had faithfully delivered God’s message to Ahab, the Lord commissioned him to deliver another message, one of judgment on Israel’s continuing failure to listen to God. The instruments of retribution were to be Hazael, who would become king in Syria (c. 893–796 <span>BC<\/span>), and Jehu, who would become king of Israel (841–814 <span>BC<\/span>). Elijah was instructed to anoint both of them. He was also told to anoint his successor, Elisha, to be his understudy until it was time for Elisha’s full ministry to begin.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ConfrontationconcerningNaboth\">Confrontation concerning Naboth<\/p>\n<p>After his return to Israel, one of Elijah’s boldest confrontations with King Ahab was over Naboth’s vineyard. Although Ahab wanted Naboth’s property, he was sensitive to the law regarding ownership of land. Further, Ahab never completely abandoned the faith of his fathers (1 Kgs 21:27-29). Jezebel, however, had no regard for the Mosaic law and conspired to have Naboth put to death on a false charge.<\/p>\n<p>When Ahab then took possession of the vineyard, Elijah branded him as a murderer and a robber. He predicted divine judgment—the fall of Ahab’s dynasty and Jezebel’s horrible death (1 Kgs 21:17-24). Ahab repented, however, and the judgment was postponed.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AhaziahsFolly\">Ahaziah’s Folly<\/p>\n<p>The Lord’s judgment on Ahab was finally executed when the king was killed in a battle with Syria in 853 <span>BC<\/span>. The dogs licked up Ahab’s blood, as the prophet had predicted (1 Kgs 21:19). Shortly after Ahaziah had succeeded his father as king, he suffered a crippling fall. While lying ill, he sent messengers to ask Baal-zebub, the god of Ekron, whether he would recover. The Lord sent Elijah to intercept them and give them a message for the king: a rebuke for ignoring the God of Israel and a warning of the king’s impending death.<\/p>\n<p>Ahaziah angrily sent a captain with 50 soldiers to arrest Elijah. They were consumed by fire from heaven at Elijah’s words. A second captain and another 50 soldiers were sent but met the same fate. The third captain who came begged the prophet to spare his and his soldiers’ lives. Elijah went with this captain and delivered God’s message to the king personally. The king would not recover but would die because he had inquired from pagan gods rather than from the true God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WarningtoJehoram\">Warning to Jehoram<\/p>\n<p>Elijah had been called primarily to minister to Israel, but he also delivered God’s word of warning to Jehoram, king of Judah, rebuking him for following Israel in its idolatry and for not walking in the godly ways of his father and grandfather (2 Chr 21:12-15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ElijahsAscentintoHeaven\">Elijah’s Ascent into Heaven<\/p>\n<p>When the end of Elijah’s ministry drew near, Elisha refused to leave him. After a journey that took them to schools of the prophets at Bethel and Jericho, the two crossed the Jordan River miraculously; Elijah struck the waters with his mantle and they parted. Elisha requested a double portion (the firstborn’s share, cf. Dt 21:17) of his master’s spirit, for he desired to be Elijah’s full successor. Elisha knew his request was granted because he saw Elijah pass into the heavens in a whirlwind bearing a chariot and horses of fire. The young prophets who had accompanied Elisha searched in vain for Elijah in the mountains and valleys around the Jordan; God had taken his faithful prophet home. Elijah thus joined Enoch as the only other man in the Bible who did not experience death.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ElijahsMessageandMiracles\">Elijah’s Message and Miracles<\/p>\n<p>As the Baal worship of Tyre made inroads into Israel through Jezebel, Elijah was sent to check its spread by emphasizing again that Israel’s God was the only God of the whole earth. He began a vital work that was continued by Jehu, who slaughtered many of the Baal worshipers among Israel’s leaders (2 Kgs 10:18-28). Elijah’s specific mission was to destroy heathen worship in order to spare Israel, thus preparing the way for the prophets who were to follow in his spirit.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles were prominent in Elijah’s ministry, given as a sign to confirm him as God’s spokesman and to turn Israel’s kings back to God. Some scholars have rejected these miracles or tried to explain them away. The OT, however, clearly testifies to their validity, and the NT affirms them.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ElijahandtheNewTestament\">Elijah and the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Malachi named Elijah as the forerunner of the “great and terrible day of the <span>Lord<\/span>” who will “turn the hearts of fathers to their children and the hearts of children to their fathers” (Mal 4:5-6). Jewish writers have often taken up the same theme in their literature: Elijah will “restore the tribes of Jacob” (Ecclus 48:10); he is mentioned in the Qumran <em>Manual of Discipline<\/em> of the Dead Sea Scrolls; he is the central sign of the resurrection of the dead according to the Mishnah, the collection of Jewish oral law; and he is the subject of songs sung at the close of the Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, Malachi’s prophecy was interpreted in the angelic annunciation to Zechariah as pointing to John the Baptist, who was to do the work of another Elijah (Lk 1:17, <span>kjv<\/span> “Elias”) and was confirmed by Jesus himself (Mt 11:14; 17:10-13).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also alluded to Elijah’s sojourn in the land of Sidon (Lk 4:25-26), and the apostle Paul referred to the prophet’s experience at Mt Horeb (Rom 11:2). The apostle James used Elijah to illustrate what it means to be a righteous man and a man of prayer (Jas 5:17).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah appeared again on the Mt of Transfiguration with Moses as they discussed Jesus’ approaching death (Mt 17:1-13; Lk 9:28-36). Some Bible scholars believe that Elijah will return as one of the two witnesses of the end times (Rv 11:3-12), in fulfillment of Malachi’s prophecy that he is to come before the dreadful judgment day of God.<\/p>\n<li>2. Chief of Benjamin’s tribe (1 Chr 8:27, <span>kjv<\/span> “Eliah”).<\/li>\n<li>3. Priest who married a gentile wife (Ezr 10:21).<\/li>\n<li>4. Layman who also married a foreign wife (Ezr 10:26).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>ELIJAH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Ninth-century <span>BC<\/span> prophet of Israel. Elijah’s name means “my God is the Lord”—appropriate for a stalwart opponent of Baal worship. The Scriptures give no information regarding his family background except that he was a Tishbite who probably came from the land of Gilead on the east bank of the Jordan River. He lived primarily during the reigns of kings Ahab (874–853 <span>BC<\/span>) and Ahaziah (853–852 <span>BC<\/span>) of Israel. The biblical account of Elijah runs from 1 Kings 17 to 2 Kings 2.<\/li>\n<p>Elijah was called by God at a critical period in Israel’s life. Economically and politically the northern kingdom was in its strongest position since its separation from the southern kingdom. Omri (885–874 <span>BC<\/span>) had initiated a policy of trade and friendly relations with the Phoenicians. To show his good faith, Omri gave his son Ahab in marriage to Jezebel, the daughter of Ethbaal, king of Tyre. She brought Baal worship with her to Israel, a false religion whose rapid spread soon threatened the kingdom’s very existence. Elijah was sent to turn the nation and its leaders back to the Lord through his prophetic message and miracles.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WarningofDrought\">Warning of Drought<\/p>\n<p>Elijah began his recorded ministry by telling Ahab that the nation would suffer a drought until the prophet himself announced its end (1 Kgs 17:1). He thus repeated Moses’ warning (Lv 26:14-39; Dt 28:15-68) of the consequences of turning away from God.<\/p>\n<p>Elijah then hid himself in a ravine on the east bank of the Jordan River by the brook Cherith (possibly the valley of the Yarmuk River in north Gilead). There he had sufficient water for his needs, and ravens brought him food twice daily. When the brook dried up, Elijah was directed to move to the Phoenician village of Zarephath near Sidon. A widow took care of him from her scanty supplies, and her obedience to Elijah was rewarded by a miraculous supply of meal and oil that was not depleted until the drought ended.<\/p>\n<p>While Elijah was staying with the widow, her son became ill and died. By the power of prayer, the child was restored to life and good health.<\/p>\n<p>In the drought’s third year the Lord told Elijah to inform Ahab that God would soon provide rain for Israel. On his return, Elijah first encountered Ahab’s officer, Obadiah, who was searching for water for the king’s livestock. Elijah sent Obadiah to arrange a meeting with Ahab. At first Obadiah refused. For three years Ahab had searched Israel and the neighboring kingdoms in vain for the prophet, no doubt in order to force him to end the drought. Obadiah was certain that while he went to bring Ahab, Israel’s most wanted “outlaw” would elude them again, thus enraging the king. When Elijah promised him that he would stay until he returned, the officer arranged for Ahab to meet the prophet.<\/p>\n<p>In the subsequent meeting Elijah rejected the king’s allegation that he was the “troubler of Israel” (1 Kgs 18:17-18). He was only obeying God, he insisted, in pointing out Ahab’s idolatry. Ahab had even permitted Jezebel to subsidize a school of Baal and Asherah prophets. Elijah then requested a public gathering on Mt Carmel as a contest between the prophets of Baal and the prophets of the Lord to determine who was the true God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ConfrontationonCarmel\">Confrontation on Carmel<\/p>\n<p>One of the highlights of Elijah’s ministry was the contest on Mt Carmel. Ahab assembled all Israel along with 850 prophets of Baal and Asherah. The famous challenge was issued: “How long are you going to waver between two opinions? If the <span>Lord<\/span> is God, follow him! But if Baal is God, then follow him!” (1 Kgs 18:21, <span>nlt<\/span>). Sacrificial animals were to be placed on two altars, one for Baal and one for the Lord, and the prophets representing each were to ask for fire from their God.<\/p>\n<p>All day long the pagan prophets called in vain on Baal. They danced a whirling, frenzied dance, cutting themselves with knives until their blood gushed. But there was no answer. Finally, Elijah’s turn came. He repaired the demolished altar of the Lord and prepared the sacrifice. For dramatic effect, he built a trench around the altar and poured water over the sacrifice until the trench overflowed. Then he said a brief prayer, and immediately fire fell from heaven and consumed the burnt offering, the wood, the stones, and the dust, and licked up the water that was in the trench (1 Kgs 18:38).<\/p>\n<p>When the people saw it, they fell on their faces in repentance, chanting, “The <span>Lord<\/span> is God! The <span>Lord<\/span> is God!” (1 Kgs 18:39). At Elijah’s command the people seized the prophets of Baal and killed them by the brook Kishon. Then Elijah, at the top of Carmel, began to pray fervently for rain. Dramatically, the sky became black with clouds and rain began to pour, ending the long drought. Ahab rode back in his chariot to Jezreel, 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) to the east. God’s Spirit enabled Elijah to outrun Ahab, and he arrived in Jezreel first.<\/p>\n<p>Jezebel, furious over the massacre of the Baal prophets, sent a message to Elijah: “May the gods also kill me if by this time tomorrow I have failed to take your life like those whom you killed” (1 Kgs 19:2, <span>nlt<\/span>). When Elijah received her message, he panicked and fled to Beersheba.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExperienceatHoreb\">Experience at Horeb<\/p>\n<p>Elijah left his servant in Beersheba, going another day’s journey into the desert alone. There he lay down under a broom tree and, in despair and exhaustion, asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel appeared, nourishing him twice with bread and water. After he had slept, Elijah continued on his way.<\/p>\n\n<p>After 40 days, Elijah arrived at Mt Horeb, where he found shelter in a cave. There the Lord spoke to him, asking what he was doing there. The prophet explained that he was the only prophet of God left in Israel, and now even his life was threatened. In response, the mighty forces of nature—a great wind, an earthquake, and fire—were displayed before Elijah to show him that the omnipotent God could intercede on his behalf with a powerful hand. Finally God encouraged Elijah in a “still, small voice.” The Lord had further tasks for him to accomplish. God also told Elijah that he was not the only faithful person in Israel; 7,000 others remained true to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Since Elijah had faithfully delivered God’s message to Ahab, the Lord commissioned him to deliver another message, one of judgment on Israel’s continuing failure to listen to God. The instruments of retribution were to be Hazael, who would become king in Syria (c. 893–796 <span>BC<\/span>), and Jehu, who would become king of Israel (841–814 <span>BC<\/span>). Elijah was instructed to anoint both of them. He was also told to anoint his successor, Elisha, to be his understudy until it was time for Elisha’s full ministry to begin.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ConfrontationconcerningNaboth\">Confrontation concerning Naboth<\/p>\n<p>After his return to Israel, one of Elijah’s boldest confrontations with King Ahab was over Naboth’s vineyard. Although Ahab wanted Naboth’s property, he was sensitive to the law regarding ownership of land. Further, Ahab never completely abandoned the faith of his fathers (1 Kgs 21:27-29). Jezebel, however, had no regard for the Mosaic law and conspired to have Naboth put to death on a false charge.<\/p>\n<p>When Ahab then took possession of the vineyard, Elijah branded him as a murderer and a robber. He predicted divine judgment—the fall of Ahab’s dynasty and Jezebel’s horrible death (1 Kgs 21:17-24). Ahab repented, however, and the judgment was postponed.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AhaziahsFolly\">Ahaziah’s Folly<\/p>\n<p>The Lord’s judgment on Ahab was finally executed when the king was killed in a battle with Syria in 853 <span>BC<\/span>. The dogs licked up Ahab’s blood, as the prophet had predicted (1 Kgs 21:19). Shortly after Ahaziah had succeeded his father as king, he suffered a crippling fall. While lying ill, he sent messengers to ask Baal-zebub, the god of Ekron, whether he would recover. The Lord sent Elijah to intercept them and give them a message for the king: a rebuke for ignoring the God of Israel and a warning of the king’s impending death.<\/p>\n<p>Ahaziah angrily sent a captain with 50 soldiers to arrest Elijah. They were consumed by fire from heaven at Elijah’s words. A second captain and another 50 soldiers were sent but met the same fate. The third captain who came begged the prophet to spare his and his soldiers’ lives. Elijah went with this captain and delivered God’s message to the king personally. The king would not recover but would die because he had inquired from pagan gods rather than from the true God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WarningtoJehoram\">Warning to Jehoram<\/p>\n<p>Elijah had been called primarily to minister to Israel, but he also delivered God’s word of warning to Jehoram, king of Judah, rebuking him for following Israel in its idolatry and for not walking in the godly ways of his father and grandfather (2 Chr 21:12-15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ElijahsAscentintoHeaven\">Elijah’s Ascent into Heaven<\/p>\n<p>When the end of Elijah’s ministry drew near, Elisha refused to leave him. After a journey that took them to schools of the prophets at Bethel and Jericho, the two crossed the Jordan River miraculously; Elijah struck the waters with his mantle and they parted. Elisha requested a double portion (the firstborn’s share, cf. Dt 21:17) of his master’s spirit, for he desired to be Elijah’s full successor. Elisha knew his request was granted because he saw Elijah pass into the heavens in a whirlwind bearing a chariot and horses of fire. The young prophets who had accompanied Elisha searched in vain for Elijah in the mountains and valleys around the Jordan; God had taken his faithful prophet home. Elijah thus joined Enoch as the only other man in the Bible who did not experience death.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ElijahsMessageandMiracles\">Elijah’s Message and Miracles<\/p>\n<p>As the Baal worship of Tyre made inroads into Israel through Jezebel, Elijah was sent to check its spread by emphasizing again that Israel’s God was the only God of the whole earth. He began a vital work that was continued by Jehu, who slaughtered many of the Baal worshipers among Israel’s leaders (2 Kgs 10:18-28). Elijah’s specific mission was to destroy heathen worship in order to spare Israel, thus preparing the way for the prophets who were to follow in his spirit.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles were prominent in Elijah’s ministry, given as a sign to confirm him as God’s spokesman and to turn Israel’s kings back to God. Some scholars have rejected these miracles or tried to explain them away. The OT, however, clearly testifies to their validity, and the NT affirms them.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ElijahandtheNewTestament\">Elijah and the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Malachi named Elijah as the forerunner of the “great and terrible day of the <span>Lord<\/span>” who will “turn the hearts of fathers to their children and the hearts of children to their fathers” (Mal 4:5-6). Jewish writers have often taken up the same theme in their literature: Elijah will “restore the tribes of Jacob” (Ecclus 48:10); he is mentioned in the Qumran <em>Manual of Discipline<\/em> of the Dead Sea Scrolls; he is the central sign of the resurrection of the dead according to the Mishnah, the collection of Jewish oral law; and he is the subject of songs sung at the close of the Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, Malachi’s prophecy was interpreted in the angelic annunciation to Zechariah as pointing to John the Baptist, who was to do the work of another Elijah (Lk 1:17, <span>kjv<\/span> “Elias”) and was confirmed by Jesus himself (Mt 11:14; 17:10-13).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also alluded to Elijah’s sojourn in the land of Sidon (Lk 4:25-26), and the apostle Paul referred to the prophet’s experience at Mt Horeb (Rom 11:2). The apostle James used Elijah to illustrate what it means to be a righteous man and a man of prayer (Jas 5:17).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah appeared again on the Mt of Transfiguration with Moses as they discussed Jesus’ approaching death (Mt 17:1-13; Lk 9:28-36). Some Bible scholars believe that Elijah will return as one of the two witnesses of the end times (Rv 11:3-12), in fulfillment of Malachi’s prophecy that he is to come before the dreadful judgment day of God.<\/p>\n<li>2. Chief of Benjamin’s tribe (1 Chr 8:27, <span>kjv<\/span> “Eliah”).<\/li>\n<li>3. Priest who married a gentile wife (Ezr 10:21).<\/li>\n<li>4. Layman who also married a foreign wife (Ezr 10:26).<\/li>","summary_ro":"ELIJAH 1. Ninth-century BC prophet of Israel. Elijah’s name means “my God is the Lord”—appropriate for a stalwart opponent of Baal worship. The Scriptures give no information regarding his family background except that he was a Tishbite who probably came from the land of Gilead on the east bank of the Jordan River. He lived primarily during the reigns of kings Ahab (874–853 BC) and Ahaziah (853–852 BC) of Israel. The biblical account of Elijah runs from 1 Kings 17 to 2 Kings 2. Elijah was cal...","summary_en":"ELIJAH 1. Ninth-century BC prophet of Israel. Elijah’s name means “my God is the Lord”—appropriate for a stalwart opponent of Baal worship. The Scriptures give no information regarding his family background except that he was a Tishbite who probably came from the land of Gilead on the east bank of the Jordan River. He lived primarily during the reigns of kings Ahab (874–853 BC) and Ahaziah (853–852 BC) of Israel. The biblical account of Elijah runs from 1 Kings 17 to 2 Kings 2. Elijah was cal...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54700,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:14","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:14-15<\/strong> <em>Elijah, the one the prophets said would come:<\/em> John is the fulfillment of Old Testament expectations of Elijah’s return (17:10-13; see Mal 4:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:14-15<\/strong> <em>Elijah, the one the prophets said would come:<\/em> John is the fulfillment of Old Testament expectations of Elijah’s return (17:10-13; see Mal 4:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:14-15 Elijah, the one the prophets said would come: John is the fulfillment of Old Testament expectations of Elijah’s return (17:10-13; see Mal 4:5).","summary_en":"11:14-15 Elijah, the one the prophets said would come: John is the fulfillment of Old Testament expectations of Elijah’s return (17:10-13; see Mal 4:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82326,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:14","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:14-15<\/strong> <em>Elijah, the one the prophets said would come:<\/em> John is the fulfillment of Old Testament expectations of Elijah’s return (17:10-13; see Mal 4:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:14-15<\/strong> <em>Elijah, the one the prophets said would come:<\/em> John is the fulfillment of Old Testament expectations of Elijah’s return (17:10-13; see Mal 4:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:14-15 Elijah, the one the prophets said would come: John is the fulfillment of Old Testament expectations of Elijah’s return (17:10-13; see Mal 4:5).","summary_en":"11:14-15 Elijah, the one the prophets said would come: John is the fulfillment of Old Testament expectations of Elijah’s return (17:10-13; see Mal 4:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":109952,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:14","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:14-15<\/strong> <em>Elijah, the one the prophets said would come:<\/em> John is the fulfillment of Old Testament expectations of Elijah’s return (17:10-13; see Mal 4:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:14-15<\/strong> <em>Elijah, the one the prophets said would come:<\/em> John is the fulfillment of Old Testament expectations of Elijah’s return (17:10-13; see Mal 4:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:14-15 Elijah, the one the prophets said would come: John is the fulfillment of Old Testament expectations of Elijah’s return (17:10-13; see Mal 4:5).","summary_en":"11:14-15 Elijah, the one the prophets said would come: John is the fulfillment of Old Testament expectations of Elijah’s return (17:10-13; see Mal 4:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137578,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:14","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:14-15<\/strong> <em>Elijah, the one the prophets said would come:<\/em> John is the fulfillment of Old Testament expectations of Elijah’s return (17:10-13; see Mal 4:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:14-15<\/strong> <em>Elijah, the one the prophets said would come:<\/em> John is the fulfillment of Old Testament expectations of Elijah’s return (17:10-13; see Mal 4:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:14-15 Elijah, the one the prophets said would come: John is the fulfillment of Old Testament expectations of Elijah’s return (17:10-13; see Mal 4:5).","summary_en":"11:14-15 Elijah, the one the prophets said would come: John is the fulfillment of Old Testament expectations of Elijah’s return (17:10-13; see Mal 4:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":11584,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Ezekiel","title_en":"Book of Ezekiel","content_ro":"<h3>EZEKIEL, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Prophetic book of the OT, originating in the time of the Babylonian exile.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Background<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was the son of Buzi (1:3), a member of a priestly family. It is unclear whether he actually served in the temple as a priest, but such was his training. His writings show that he knew the regulations for sacrifices, the rituals, and the people’s expectations of a priest. In exile Ezekiel the priest spoke God’s word about the future of the temple to his fellow exiles. Settled at Tel-abib, on the canal of Kebar, the thousands of deportees eked out a meager existence. They hoped for a speedy return to Judah and a change for the better in the international situation. Their hope was enflamed by the spirited preaching of false prophets, likened to jackals among the ruins (13:4). They piously said, “The Lord declares . . . ,” but they were actually self-commissioned (v 6). They deceived the people with a message of peace at a time when God’s judgment was about to be poured out on his people (v 10). They had led the people to distrust prophecy to such an extent that a proverb circulated among the people that “the days grow long, and every vision comes to nought” (12:22). Much time had passed since visions of God’s judgment had been given to the people, and nothing could be interpreted as a fulfillment of those visions. Ezekiel was called to serve his community by symbolic acts, visions, and verbal messages in order to convince the people that God’s judgment was imminent (v 23).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandBackground\">Date and Background<\/p>\n<p>The ministry of the prophet Ezekiel can be understood best against the backdrop of his time. If, as the church father Origen believed, the vague reference “in the thirtieth year” (1:1) marks the prophet’s age at the time of his first vision, Ezekiel was born during the rule of King Josiah of Judah (c. 640–609 <span>BC<\/span>). Josiah was the grandson of King Manasseh, whose sacrilegious acts had brought God’s judgment on the kingdom of Judah (2 Kgs 21:10-15).<\/p>\n<p>Though Judah’s political situation was perilous, Josiah led the nation in a radical reformation that began with the finding of the “Book of the Law” (2 Kgs 22) in the year that Ezekiel was born (c. 621 <span>BC<\/span>). Idolatry was done away with and the people turned back to God, but God’s judgment on Judah was unchangeable (23:26-27). Josiah erred in trying to make Judah a kingdom with which other states had to reckon. He was threatened when the Egyptian pharaoh Neco passed through Judah on his way to aid the weakened Assyrian kingdom. Josiah marched to meet the Egyptian forces, but his troops were unable to stand against the Egyptians, and he died in battle (v 29). Egypt took control of Judah, and Pharaoh Neco placed Jehoiakim in power over Jerusalem. Egyptian control did not last long, however, for in 605 <span>BC<\/span> Egypt and Assyria were defeated by Babylonia’s king Nebuchadnezzar at Carchemish. The Babylonians then pushed south to Jerusalem, and the first deportation of Judean leaders (among them the prophet Daniel) took place.<\/p>\n<p>Jehoiakim was permitted to continue ruling over Judah as a vassal king of Nebuchadnezzar. But his dealings with Egypt brought the emperor’s wrath down upon him. Before the Babylonians could address the Judean situation, Jehoiakim died and his son Jehoiachin was crowned. When the Babylonian forces arrived at the gates of Jerusalem, Jehoiachin and thousands of the aristocracy were taken to Babylon (2 Kgs 24:10-17). Among those deportees was Ezekiel, then about 25 years old.<\/p>\n<p>Although the book says otherwise, many scholars think that Ezekiel lived and taught in Judah for the duration of the siege and the fall of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>). They conclude this from Ezekiel’s familiarity with idolatry in the temple and his vivid descriptions of Jerusalem’s last days (Ez 8:11). Others believe that Ezekiel ministered both to the exiled community and to the Judeans living in Judah. Neither interpretation does full justice to the claims of the book itself. Ezekiel was exiled in 597 <span>BC<\/span>. He was called to bring God’s word to the deportees at Tel-abib; he was granted a vision of the horrible practices in the temple court; and he was familiar with Jerusalem and Judah from having lived there and from reports on affairs in Jerusalem coming to the exiles through messengers. Jeremiah, Ezekiel’s contemporary, was prophesying in Jerusalem, but there is no evidence that Jeremiah and Ezekiel knew of each other’s ministry. If Ezekiel had brought God’s word to Jerusalem during the siege, some reference to Jeremiah might appear in his writings. If Jeremiah was supported by Ezekiel’s ministry in Jerusalem, he probably would have included a positive word for his colleague in his book. The book of Ezekiel plainly says that Ezekiel lived and preached in exile (see 1:1-3; 11:24-25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The prophecy of Ezekiel is easily outlined by subject matter and chronology. The chronology of the period permits a division before and after 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Jerusalem). Chapters 1–24 cover the pre-586 ministry of Ezekiel, whereas chapters 33–48 represent his post-586 ministry. Chapters 25–32 (oracles against the foreign nations) function as a transition between the book’s two major divisions.<\/p>\n<p>The book’s outline according to subject matter divides into four parts: Ezekiel’s call (1:1–3:21); prophecies of judgment against Israel (3:22–24:27); oracles against the nations (25:1–32:32); and proclamation of hope (33:1–48:35).<\/p>\n<h5>Ezekiel’s Call (1:1–3:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The prophet’s call in one sense was similar to that of Isaiah and Jeremiah. Isaiah received his mission in a vision of God’s glory in the temple (Is 6). Jeremiah was called unexpectedly in his youth, and received signs that solemnly set forth the nature of his mission (Jer 1:11-15). The call of Ezekiel combined those two elements. Revelation of God’s glory to the prophet at the same time revealed the nature of the prophet’s mission. Ezekiel’s call contained a full description of God’s glory. Isaiah briefly stated that he saw the Lord enthroned in the temple, and he concentrated on the seraphim representing and magnifying God’s glory. Ezekiel elaborated on the revelation of the Lord’s glory as well as on the ministering angels who went before the Lord as part of his royal entourage. The vision of God’s glory, though difficult to understand, is the key to the book of Ezekiel.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel, as a priest, was concerned about the future of the temple. That sacred place had been ordained by God as his home among his people. The glory, presence, and holiness of God were symbolized in the temple (see 1 Kgs 8:10-11). In exile Ezekiel could not serve his people as a priest, for they were far from Jerusalem, the city God had chosen. Against all expectations the Lord revealed himself to Ezekiel in the land of Babylon. In calling Ezekiel to a prophetic ministry, God assured his servant that he had not forsaken his people, even though they had been banished from the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet’s vision began with a storm. As a large cloud approached from the north, Ezekiel saw a brightness surrounding the cloud, four creatures, and four wheels. The combination of creatures and wheels suggests that the Lord appeared in a chariot. God’s chariot is a familiar OT representation of his coming in judgment (see Is 66:15-16). The wheels within wheels and the position of the four living creatures may signify God’s total control over the whole earth, so he could move his “chariot of judgment” in any direction. It is also possible that the living creatures with their four faces, and the wheels full of eyes, may be separate symbols showing that God sees all that happens and thereby knows the plight of the exiles. In the vision the prophet’s attention was drawn to a throne above the heads of the creatures. On the throne was “the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (1:28). In his vision of God’s coming in judgment, Ezekiel received his call to the prophetic ministry: “Son of man, I send you to the people of Israel, to a nation of rebels who have rebelled against me” (2:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). During a dark hour of Israel’s history, Ezekiel had to prophesy, rebuke his fellow exiles (3:11), and be responsible as a watchman over the house of Israel (3:17; cf. 33:1-9). Symbolic of his mission was a scroll filled with lamentations and woe (2:9-10), which when eaten became sweet as honey (3:1-3). Difficult as the mission was, God’s presence and the certain fulfillment of the prophecies sweetened Ezekiel’s task. Such encouragement was intended to take away any fear of the rebellious Israelites (2:6-7). Instead of being elated with his mission, however, Ezekiel became despondent.<\/p>\n<p>A week later, the word of the Lord came to Ezekiel to remind him of his important role as a watchman (3:16-17). Ezekiel became responsible for Israel as a nation, not just for individuals. His witness to Israel had the express aim of national repentance (vv 18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was confined to his house by God (3:24-25). The house ministry was to be carried on only with those Israelites who sought God’s will, for the Lord had abandoned those who continued in their apostasy. The prophetic word would not help the apostates (v 26). The principle of Ezekiel’s ministry is found in 3:27: “Whenever I give you a message, I will loosen your tongue and let you speak. Then you will say to them, ‘This is what the Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span> says!’ Some of them will listen, but some will ignore you, for they are rebels” (<span>nlt<\/span>; cf. Mt 11:15; 13:43).<\/p>\n<h5>Prophecies of Judgment against Israel (3:22–24:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Symbolism figures prominently in Ezekiel’s writing. His priestly background and preparation probably suited him to receive and communicate God’s word in symbolic acts and speech. Chapters 4 and 5 contain four symbolic acts: (1) Jerusalem’s siege is portrayed on a brick (Ez 4:1-3); (2) Israel’s iniquity is represented by Ezekiel’s lying on his sides (vv 4-8); (3) Jerusalem’s grief and horror in the last days of the siege are represented by Ezekiel’s food and drink (vv 9-17); (4) Jerusalem’s fate is represented by the prophet’s hair being cut off (5:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel’s instructions were further illuminated by God’s explanation of Israel’s apostasy (5:6-7) and his judgment on Israel (vv 8-12). The judgment will last until the Israelites admit that in covenant faithfulness their Lord has inflicted righteous judgment on them (v 13).<\/p>\n<p>God would direct his judgment first against the people and the city of Jerusalem. Next in line were the mountains of Israel (ch 6) and the land (ch 7). God’s wrath included the cities and cultic sites in the hill country of Judah, leaving no protection for the people (6:3-6). Abominations that were practiced throughout the land caused God’s judgment to fall on the land as well as on the people (7:2-3, 10-11, 23). But because God is righteous, he judged the people according to their ways of life, desiring that they would once more acknowledge him as their God (7:27).<\/p>\n<p>The prophet then (chs 8–11) focused on the abominations practiced in Jerusalem, particularly idolatry in the temple courts, which caused the judgment announced in chapters 1–7. An idol had been erected in the inner court (8:3-5). By the wall of the court, elders of the city were paying homage to the idols that surrounded the court (vv 11-12). Closer to the temple, women were weeping for the god Tammuz (v 14), and men were worshiping the sun (v 16). In preparation for the ultimate judgment on the land, the prophet placed a mark on the foreheads of the few faithful Israelites so that they would survive (9:4-6). Then (ch 10), the glory of God, which had filled the temple from the time of Solomon, gradually left: “Then the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span> went up from the city and stopped above the mountain to the east” (11:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The people, now without divine protection, were being handed over to the Babylonians (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>The message of doom for Jerusalem contains four elements of hope: restoration of the people (11:17), restoration of the land (v 17), purification of the people (v 18), and renewed fellowship between God and his people (vv 19-20). The prophet develops those four themes in chapters 33–48.<\/p>\n<p>The visions of chapters 10 and 11 made clear that when God removed his presence from Jerusalem, the exile was approaching. Those who were already in Babylon were unwilling to believe that such an extensive devastation of Jerusalem would happen or that the people would all be exiled and the land become desolate.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel acted out the certainty of God’s word of judgment by packing his bags and showing the baggage to his fellow exiles. First, he placed the bags in the courtyard outside his modest home. Next, he went out by making a hole through the wall. Finally, the prophet walked about the settlement with his bags in full view. Skeptical observers did not understand Ezekiel and probably thought he was crazy. The believers who saw him understood. His strange actions dramatized how the king’s aides would do all they could to help King Zedekiah escape just before the fall of Jerusalem. Second Kings 25 tells how the king and his soldiers left Jerusalem for the wilderness, to be overtaken by the Babylonians at Jericho and brought before Nebuchadnezzar at Riblah. As a captive, Zedekiah witnessed the murder of his sons; then his eyes were put out, and he was sent into exile with the other Judeans (cf. Ez 12:13). The prophet’s explanation concluded with a word of comfort. Because of his covenant with Abraham, God promised not to destroy the people completely. A remnant who overcame the sword, famine, and pestilence would live to tell the story of God’s judgment (vv 15-16).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel further illustrated the nation’s plight by eating as though full of fear, depicting the great trauma that all of Judah’s inhabitants would soon undergo.<\/p>\n<p>Both symbolic acts, packing his belongings and eating, emphasized the truthfulness of God’s word. The people needed to face the nature of their God: He is magnificent, and when he speaks, his words are powerful and come to pass. Thus, the devastation of the land and the people’s exile were a fulfillment of God’s word through the prophets. The judgment was meant to produce a recognition of the Lord, repentance, and a return to God. Some in Judah doubted the efficacy of God’s prophecies, saying, “Time passes, making a liar of every prophet” (12:22). Others thought God’s word would come true in the distant future (v 27). The prevailing attitude of distrust in God’s word had been stimulated by the popular preaching of false prophets (ch 13). Never commissioned by the Lord, they deceived God’s people by lying and misdirecting them with messages of peace (vv 8-10). Wickedness, lying, and deceit were encouraged among the people by such false prophets (v 22). The magnitude of their sin and their great responsibility for Judah’s fall would be matched by the Lord’s heavy judgment. Yet God would save his people from such evil and will prepare a righteous nation with whom to maintain his covenant (v 23).<\/p>\n<p>The certainty of the judgment has been connected with the truthfulness of God’s word. Ezekiel’s difficult task of affirming the doom of Jerusalem to stubborn hearers was intensified by the people’s idolatry. Their whole way of life denied the existence of God. They practiced idolatry in their worship, and they had set up idols in their hearts (14:3). Before the covenant with God could be restored, they had to be purified from their idolatry. Even so, repentance would not guarantee immunity from judgment. Sword, famine, wild beasts, and plagues would ravage the population (v 21). After the execution of his judgment, God would take back those survivors who had turned to him for mercy. God would surely accomplish all that he intended for his people’s good (v 23).<\/p>\n<p>In chapters 15–17 Ezekiel uses three parables to set forth the apostasy, present uselessness, and judgment of Israel. Jerusalem and Judah are compared to a piece of charred wood, an adulterous woman, and a vine.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 15 reviews Jerusalem’s case. Jerusalem is compared to a piece of wood, both ends of which have been charred with fire, so that the wood is of no value. As the whole piece of wood is burned instead of being saved, so Jerusalem would undergo complete devastation (15:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 16 presents God’s case against Jerusalem from a different perspective, stressing his care for Jerusalem in the past. The beginnings of her history are compared to the birth of a female child, left abandoned by her mother (16:3-5). God adopted the child and washed and clothed her (vv 6-7). He made a covenant with her (v 8), making her his own possession. He generously gave her all the fine things of life (vv 9-13). In the height of her development, Jerusalem’s fame spread to the nations (v 14). Her self-reliance made her a spiritual prostitute as she took up the religious practices and way of life of the nations (vv 15-34). The cities of Sodom (Gn 19) and Samaria (2 Kgs 17:6), known for their immorality, are called Jerusalem’s sisters (Ez 16:46). They had been judged by God, but the corruption of those cities was little compared to the lewdness of Jerusalem (vv 48-51). Thus, Jerusalem also would surely fall and become desolate. Yet Ezekiel anticipates the judgment’s final outcome; Jerusalem will be restored to covenantal blessing (vv 62-63) after her repentance.<\/p>\n<p>The third parable (ch 17) focuses on God’s sovereignty over political developments. Assyria was no longer a power to be reckoned with. Babylon and Egypt both exercised dominion, although the balance of power was veering in favor of Babylon. Their extension of power is likened to an eagle. Nebuchadnezzar, pictured as “a great eagle with broad wings full of many-colored feathers,” took control over the affairs of Judah by removing Jehoiachin, “the highest branch of a cedar tree,” from office and by exiling him with young leaders of the Judean state (17:3-4). Ezekiel was among them. Nebuchadnezzar let the Judeans control their own affairs under Zedekiah but expected them to be subject to Babylon and not to any other power. But Judah (likened to a vine) tried to ally itself with Pharaoh Hophra of Egypt, “another great eagle with broad wings and full plumage” (v 7), against Nebuchadnezzar. Zedekiah’s folly in turning to Egypt would cause Nebuchadnezzar to pull up the vine by its roots and make it wither (vv 9-10). In explaining the parable, God told the exiles that Judah’s fall was a result of its unfaithfulness to King Nebuchadnezzar, to whom Judah owed allegiance by covenant (vv 13-18). Judah’s unfaithfulness thus extended to all of its relationships: religious, cultural, and political. After the exile, God promised, he would restore his people to their land under a Messiah, “a tender shoot” (v 22). The messianic rule is signified by the young twig, which when planted in the land will become a magnificent cedar, giving shade and protection to the birds. Chapter 17 is an inspiring affirmation of the sovereignty of God in human affairs (“All the trees will know that it is I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, who cuts down the tall tree and helps the short tree to grow tall. It is I who makes the green tree wither and gives new life to the dead tree”—17:24, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 18–22 contain Ezekiel’s oracles to Judah, its leaders, and the exiles. First, he enunciates God’s standard of righteousness: “The person who sins will be the one who dies” (18:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). The people are charging God with injustice, for they believe themselves to be under God’s judgment for the sins of their ancestors (vv 25-29). Although the Ten Commandments do say that God may punish “the sins of their parents to the third and the fourth generations” (Ex 20:5, <span>nlt<\/span>), the prophet vindicates God’s justice, telling the people that they are not being punished merely for their ancestors’ sin. Each person must be directly accountable to God; the sinner will die in wickedness, and the righteous will live by righteousness. A life of faithfulness to God’s moral and civil law will be rewarded (Ez 18:5-9). Even if one’s father was a sinner, the father’s sin is not transferable (vv 14-18). God is ready to forgive any sinner who repents (v 27). The prophet’s vindication of God’s justice becomes a call to repentance. The sinners in Judah and in exile were thus warned of the consequences of their evil, and were exhorted to return to their God and his standard of right and wrong (vv 31-32).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 19 contains two parables in the form of a lamentation. The first portrays a lioness and her two cubs. The lioness is Hamutal, the wife of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:31), who bore two sons: Jehoahaz and Zedekiah. Jehoahaz is referred to in Ezekiel 19:3-4 as a cub who grew up and was taken to Egypt (by Pharaoh Neco in 608 <span>BC<\/span>; see 2 Kgs 23:31-34). Zedekiah succeeded to the throne ten years later. In the lamentation the prophet imaginatively represents Zedekiah as a young cub who is ultimately taken to Babylon as a rebellious ruler (Ez 19:7-9). The second parable changes the imagery to a vine, representing Israel (v 10). In its early days God blessed Israel with strong rulers, but now the vine was wilting as Zedekiah irresponsibly led Judah to its last days. Ezekiel’s lamentation stresses the lack of a good candidate for the throne and the lack of life in the vine (vv 13-14).<\/p>\n<p>In chapter 20 the prophet concludes God’s argument against his people. He reviews the history of Israel’s past, starting with God’s self-revelation in Egypt (20:5-6). He took to himself a stubborn nation, tied to idolatry (v 8) and prone to apostasy (vv 13, 21). Israel wanted to be one of the great nations (v 32) instead of a sanctified people (v 12). As a result of its spiritual hardness, Israel is dispersed to live among the nations (v 35). Yet God had a solemn covenant with Israel, made by oath to the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. On the basis of that covenant, God will reach out with compassion to those who repent of their sinful ways (vv 37-44). In Israel’s judgment and restoration the nations will see the holiness of God, which does not tolerate unfaithfulness in Israel (v 41).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel’s prophecies alternate between God’s judgment on Israel’s sin and his restoration of Israel, spanning the bridge between Israel’s past and future. In view of the people’s doubts of the coming judgment on Jerusalem, he stresses the necessity of judgment and the need for repentance. Still, the future restoration of a remnant is touched upon here and there as the counterpart of his message of judgment. After announcing the fall of Jerusalem, the prophet shifts from a message of judgment to one of hope.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet returns to the proclamation of judgment in four oracles (20:45–21:32). He speaks against the Negev Desert area (20:45-49), Jerusalem and the land of Israel (21:2-17, 20-27), and against the Ammonites (vv 28-32). God permitted the sword of Nebuchadnezzar to be his instrument of judgment upon the Judeans (v 19). He would see to the judgment on the Ammonites. The Judeans would recover their previous glory, but the memory of the Ammonites would perish (vv 27, 32). The oracle against the Ammonites anticipates a larger treatise on Israel’s other neighbors: Moab, Edom, Philistia, Tyre, Sidon, and Egypt (chs 25–29).<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 22–24 contain a renewed series of indictments against Jerusalem. Jerusalem’s religious and civil leadership (the prophets, priests, and princes) are corrupt, and the people have followed their example (22:25-30). The parable of the two sisters, Oholah and Oholibah, is a variation of the parable of adulterous Jerusalem (ch 23; cf. ch 16). It differs in that the comparison drawn between Jerusalem, soon to be exiled, and Samaria, already in exile, is more explicit in the parable of Oholah and Oholibah. In chapter 16 Jerusalem was charged with greater sins than Sodom and Samaria, but was promised restoration. Only the adulterous nature of the two sisters and God’s judgment on them is emphasized in chapter 23, with no word of restoration. This parable is a fitting introduction to that of the boiling pot (ch 24), in which Jerusalem is compared to a rusty pot boiling with water. The Jerusalemites, likened to pieces of meat in the boiling pot, will die in the city. The parable was pronounced on the starting day of Nebuchadnezzar’s siege of Jerusalem. Thus, the exiles were divinely forewarned of God’s intent to destroy the temple (24:21) and were prepared for messengers bringing the bad news of Jerusalem’s fall.<\/p>\n<p>Those oracles and parables conclude the first division of the book. Ezekiel has stated God’s case against the rebellious house of Judah in many ways. His metaphors have likened Judah to a burnt piece of wood, to an uprooted vine, to a baby who grew up to be an adulteress, and to Oholibah, the adulterous woman. He has countered arguments against the fulfillment of God’s word and against the justice of God. He has reassured the exiles that God will not leave the righteous and that the future of Israel begins with a righteous remnant. The pendulum of Ezekiel’s writing has swung from judgment to restoration, while the clock was bringing Judah closer to the hour of its fall.<\/p>\n<h5>Oracles against the Nations (25:1–32:32)<\/h5>\n<p>Ammon, Moab, and Edom were Israel’s neighbors to the east. Because they were ethnically related to Israel, they were not attacked by the Israelites on their march to the Promised Land. Ammon and Moab were descendants of Lot, Abraham’s nephew, and the Edomites descended from Esau, the brother of Jacob. Although God forbade war with them, relations between Israel and its eastern neighbors were always tense. Israel had been overrun by the Ammonites for a time, and Israel was never successful in controlling the Edomites’ competitive trade relations. Those neighboring nations joined the Babylonian attack against Jerusalem and rejoiced when Jerusalem fell and the temple was devastated (Ez 25:3-12). They were ready to take over and loot Judah’s cities, and to instigate trouble in a time when Jerusalem was distressed. Therefore, says Ezekiel, God’s judgment will also extend to Ammon, Moab, and Edom (vv 4-14).<\/p>\n<p>The Philistines had been Israel’s enemy to the southwest. During the period of the judges and the united monarchy, the Philistines had controlled much of Israel’s territory. King David successfully limited the Philistine threat by confining them to their own territory. But in Ezekiel’s day they were still considered Israel’s “everlasting” enemy (25:15), possibly intensified by Philistine support of the Babylonian invasion of Judah.<\/p>\n<p>The city of Tyre had received reports of the overthrow of Jerusalem and was ready to exploit the opportunity for its own advantage (26:2). Tyre’s trade position was unrivaled; its ships crossed the seas to exchange goods with many distant lands (Ez 27). But Tyre would soon be broken by the Babylonians, its wealth dried up with the destruction of the fleet and the murder of its sailors (27:26).<\/p>\n<p>The prince of Tyre is singled out in chapter 28, but verse 12 refers to the “king” of Tyre. Interpreters disagree whether they are one person or two. Those who distinguish between the two understand the prince of Tyre to be the ruler of that city, but they consider the “king” of Tyre to represent Satan (28:13-15). The Garden of Eden with all its splendor is an appropriate setting for the original glory of an angelic Satan before his fall. But there is no reason within the context to distinguish between the prince and the king of Tyre. Each is said to have exalted himself, and both took authority over men as if they were gods and enjoyed all the splendor and royalty that belong to God. And both prince and king fall from their high position. The passage is a magnificent example of Ezekiel’s literary ability. He draws a glorious picture of the Garden of Eden, reworking the same theme as he depicts the glory and fall of the king of Tyre. Ezekiel presents him as a cherub, in accordance with the local belief that the king was divine. He wore the finest clothing, with nine kinds of precious stones (v 13). Though God had elevated him to the royal throne (vv 13-14), the king’s heart turned to materialism and to religious and judicial corruption (vv 16-18). In a sense the king (prince) represents the people of Tyre. They were all guilty of corruption, injustice, and violence. If God judged his covenant people for their perversion of justice and for their sins, his judgment would surely come also on the city of Tyre (vv 18-19). When the Babylonians marched on Tyre, they laboriously built a jetty from the mainland to the city. At the same time Tyrian ships loaded with goods and treasures sailed out across the Mediterranean, so that when Nebuchadnezzar’s troops finally breached the walls, little loot could be taken (29:18).<\/p>\n<p>The city of Sidon also cheered Jerusalem’s destruction. Sidon was a port city in Phoenicia, to the north of Tyre. By pestilence and war, the inhabitants of Sidon would learn the justice of Israel’s God.<\/p>\n<p>Six nations (Ammon, Moab, Edom, Philistia, Tyre, and Sidon) scorned Israel at the fall of Jerusalem. Because God had invested his holiness in the temple of Jerusalem and in his people, the temple’s destruction and the people’s exile signified to the nations that Israel’s God was impotent. They did not realize that the reason for Israel’s fate was God’s intolerance of his people’s sin. God’s holiness required the punishment of sin, and it also required vindication for his name (28:22-23). God was still concerned for his people, that Israel might know he had removed the scorn of their neighbors (v 24). In the restoration of Israel the Lord would further manifest his holiness before the nations. Israel would receive back the land, vineyards, and houses, and would enjoy the bounty of the Lord in peace (vv 25-26).<\/p>\n<p>Egypt had convinced the people of Israel and Judah that with its help the Assyrians and the Babylonians could not stand their ground in Palestine. In 722 <span>BC<\/span> the Assyrian troops took the northern capital of Samaria, and in 586 the Babylonians conquered Jerusalem, while Egypt remained passive. The Egyptians had desired control over Palestine for economic reasons, but not at the expense of their own welfare. Egypt, too, would lose its leadership under God’s judgment (29:9-16). Reduced to dependence on foreign powers, Egypt would no longer be a stumbling block for Israel. First, Babylonia was permitted to break Egypt’s power (23:1–32:21); later, the Persians, Greeks, and Romans would incorporate Egypt as a province. The fall of Egypt coincided with the fall of several great and small kingdoms: Assyria (32:22-23), Elam (vv 24-25), Meshech and Tubal (vv 26-28), Edom (v 29), and Sidon (v 30).<\/p>\n<h5>Proclamation of Hope (33:1–48:35)<\/h5>\n<p>After the visions of God’s judgment on the surrounding nations, Ezekiel returns to the future hope of Israel. In the first major section of his book he dealt with the reasons for Judah’s exile and the destruction of the temple, alluding often to the future of Israel. But the prophet’s organization of his material included, between prophecies of Israel’s judgment and restoration, the oracles of God’s judgment on Israel’s neighbors who had encouraged and rejoiced in its fall. Throughout its history Israel had allowed foreign nations to influence its religion, culture, and form of government. The reduction of their powers meant Israel, restored to the Promised Land, would be more free for faithfulness to God. Before taking up the theme of the restoration, Ezekiel reviews the emphases of chapters 1–24: (1) He was called to be a watchman over Israel (33:1-9; cf. 1:1–3:21). (2) Israel had sinned against the Lord and had to receive a righteous judgment (33:10). (3) Jerusalem was to be taken by the Babylonians (v 21). (4) Israel’s repentance is necessary for restoration (vv 11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Thus far, his ministry had not met with success. The exiles who had heard his messages were full of appreciation for Ezekiel’s rhetorical and literary abilities (33:32). They readily accepted Ezekiel as a watchman who warned the people of the impending catastrophe at Jerusalem, and they may have admitted that their sin was the reason for God’s judgment on Israel and Jerusalem. But they were slow in applying the prophetic word to their own lives. God was ready to forgive their sins if they repented, acknowledged him, and demonstrated their renewed spirit by practicing the law of God (v 32). Now that the news of Jerusalem had been reported to the exiles (v 21), the necessity for the people to act responsibly was even more urgent. The Lord had demonstrated that Ezekiel was a true prophet (v 33).<\/p>\n<p>The success of Ezekiel’s ministry was not measured in numbers. He faithfully declared the word of God in word, sign, and parable. The exiles had followed the false hopes proclaimed by false “shepherds” who had fattened themselves at the expense of the flock (34:2-3). They did not take care of those in need (v 4), and they allowed the flock to be scattered (vv 5-6). God promised his people that he would be the faithful shepherd, bring the sheep together, feed them, and care for them (34:11-15; cf. Ps 23). God would also distinguish between the sheep and the goats, to find out whose hearts were right with him, so that the true sheep could be restored to God’s flock (Ez 34:20-22). God’s promise included the restoration of the land and the restoration of the divinely appointed Davidic dynasty (v 24). The renewed fellowship between the Lord and Israel under the messianic ruler would be sealed with a new covenant, the “covenant of peace.” That covenant assured the people of God’s blessing on their labor, bringing them abundant harvests (vv 26-27). The people would not be forced to fight against nature in their pursuits (vv 25-28). They would not have to struggle against other peoples who might try to share in their blessings by force (vv 27-29). The prophetic vision telescoped the events of the restoration of Israel after the exile, the coming of Jesus the Messiah (cf. Jn 10), and the full restoration of the sin-cursed world.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 34 is the key to the messages of restoration. The emphases include the outworking of the frequently repeated verse “They will truly be my people, and I will be their God” (11:20; cf. 34:30; 36:28). The most significant aspects of the restoration theme include: (1) God’s gracious restoration of his people to covenant blessing (36:20-36; 37:23-26; 39:25); (2) God’s restoration of the nation of Israel to the land (36:1-15, 24; 37:14-23; 39:27); (3) God’s new covenant, giving his Spirit to his people (36:25-27; 37:14; 39:29), and his blessing on his people (36:8-12, 29-38; 39:9-10, 26), assuring them of victory over their enemies (35:1-15; 36:36; 37:28; 38:1–39:24); (4) God’s appointment of a Davidic king, the Messiah, over his people (37:24-25); and (5) God’s temple restored among his people (37:26-27).<\/p>\n<h6>The People of God<\/h6>\n<p>The rejection of the exiles did not last forever. Based on the Abrahamic covenant, the Lord promised to bless the faithful remnant and to make of them a new people. The imagery of a valley of dry bones is particularly fitting. The dry bones represent God’s people without hope (37:11). Ezekiel proclaims to them the good news that God will renew and restore them (v 12). The Lord’s purpose for his people is that all the nations may honor his holy name through his people (39:7, 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>The Land<\/h6>\n<p>The promise also extends to the land, originally given to Abraham and his descendants. The Abrahamic covenant included a messianic element, for through the family of Abraham living in the Promised Land all nations would receive God’s blessing (Gn 12:3). In a vision Ezekiel saw the boundaries and described the division of the land (Ez 47–48). The royal city of Jerusalem is the central symbol of God’s presence among his people; its name will be “The Lord is there” (48:8-35).<\/p>\n<h6>The New Covenant<\/h6>\n<p>The Abrahamic covenant is renewed, a gracious covenant that expresses the restored relationship. “Covenant of peace” fittingly describes its nature and benefits. The restless people of God are promised rest from their searching, their enemies, and their toil. The change in relationship is further emphasized by God’s sending of his Spirit, who will add a new dimension to the lifestyle of his people. Obedience to God will no longer be constrained, for God’s Spirit helps his people to do his will. A new heart, controlled by the Spirit of God, is given to the Lord’s people (36:26-27). The presence of the Spirit also signifies a new life for the people (37:14; see Jn 3:8, 16; Acts 2:38; Rom 8:2-4, 15).<\/p>\n<h6>The Messiah<\/h6>\n<p>The OT hope of a messianic king is crystallized in Ezekiel’s message. His rule will be everlasting (Ez 37:25), over all God’s people who have new hearts (vv 15-25).<\/p>\n<h6>The Temple<\/h6>\n<p>As a priest, Ezekiel remained keenly interested in the temple, priesthood, sacrificial regulations, and festivals. A large section of the prophecy’s last division describes the temple’s revived worship (40:1–46:24). His vision of the glory of God, so important in the messages of God’s judgment on Jerusalem (chs 1, 10–11), now assures the remnant that God did not forsake his people (43:2-5). He will dwell among them, for the temple is a symbol of God’s presence (37:27). Some interpreters believe that the temple, with its ritual as described in Ezekiel 40–46, will be restored in the messianic era before the last judgment. Others believe the promises about the temple provide a positive symbolic answer to Ezekiel’s greatest concern: whether God will return to be with his people (48:35; see Jn 2:21; Rv 21:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>There are various interpretations of chapters 34–48. As a watchman to Israel, Ezekiel had a message for the exiled Jewish community. Thus the prophecy’s fulfillment must have begun with the decree of Cyrus I (538 <span>BC<\/span>) permitting the Jews to return to their land (Ezr 1:1-3). Two rival schools of interpretation exist on how the prophecy is fulfilled beyond Israel’s restoration to the land. Those who interpret Israel as simply the nation view the modern return of Jewish people to the land of Israel as a continuation of God’s prophetic promise. They believe that God’s plan for Israel is being fulfilled along with, and in addition to, his plan for the Christian church. The fulfillment of those prophecies will be inaugurated by the coming of the messianic king, who will give earthly peace to the Jewish people. The temple worship (Ez 40–48) will be restored in some way during the period of the messianic kingdom. The church will enjoy a small share in all the events centered on the Jews. The promises of Ezekiel’s vision are thus limited to the nation of Israel and must be fulfilled before the coming of a new heaven and earth.<\/p>\n<p>Other interpreters believe that Ezekiel wrote for the benefit of spiritual descendants of Abraham who believe, as Abraham did, in God’s promises (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:11-13; Gal 3:6-9, 29). All who have faith like Abraham, whether Jews or Gentiles, are regarded as Abraham’s offspring (Gal 3:28-29). Ezekiel’s message thus would include all of God’s gracious work among Christian Gentiles, who have become the recipients of God’s promises and benefits. It is possible, on the basis of 1 Peter 1:10-11, to interpret Ezekiel’s language as a prophetic expression of how God’s grace would come to all those who become reconciled to God through faith in the gospel.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Ezekiel (Person); Prophecy.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EZEKIEL, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Prophetic book of the OT, originating in the time of the Babylonian exile.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Background<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was the son of Buzi (1:3), a member of a priestly family. It is unclear whether he actually served in the temple as a priest, but such was his training. His writings show that he knew the regulations for sacrifices, the rituals, and the people’s expectations of a priest. In exile Ezekiel the priest spoke God’s word about the future of the temple to his fellow exiles. Settled at Tel-abib, on the canal of Kebar, the thousands of deportees eked out a meager existence. They hoped for a speedy return to Judah and a change for the better in the international situation. Their hope was enflamed by the spirited preaching of false prophets, likened to jackals among the ruins (13:4). They piously said, “The Lord declares . . . ,” but they were actually self-commissioned (v 6). They deceived the people with a message of peace at a time when God’s judgment was about to be poured out on his people (v 10). They had led the people to distrust prophecy to such an extent that a proverb circulated among the people that “the days grow long, and every vision comes to nought” (12:22). Much time had passed since visions of God’s judgment had been given to the people, and nothing could be interpreted as a fulfillment of those visions. Ezekiel was called to serve his community by symbolic acts, visions, and verbal messages in order to convince the people that God’s judgment was imminent (v 23).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandBackground\">Date and Background<\/p>\n<p>The ministry of the prophet Ezekiel can be understood best against the backdrop of his time. If, as the church father Origen believed, the vague reference “in the thirtieth year” (1:1) marks the prophet’s age at the time of his first vision, Ezekiel was born during the rule of King Josiah of Judah (c. 640–609 <span>BC<\/span>). Josiah was the grandson of King Manasseh, whose sacrilegious acts had brought God’s judgment on the kingdom of Judah (2 Kgs 21:10-15).<\/p>\n<p>Though Judah’s political situation was perilous, Josiah led the nation in a radical reformation that began with the finding of the “Book of the Law” (2 Kgs 22) in the year that Ezekiel was born (c. 621 <span>BC<\/span>). Idolatry was done away with and the people turned back to God, but God’s judgment on Judah was unchangeable (23:26-27). Josiah erred in trying to make Judah a kingdom with which other states had to reckon. He was threatened when the Egyptian pharaoh Neco passed through Judah on his way to aid the weakened Assyrian kingdom. Josiah marched to meet the Egyptian forces, but his troops were unable to stand against the Egyptians, and he died in battle (v 29). Egypt took control of Judah, and Pharaoh Neco placed Jehoiakim in power over Jerusalem. Egyptian control did not last long, however, for in 605 <span>BC<\/span> Egypt and Assyria were defeated by Babylonia’s king Nebuchadnezzar at Carchemish. The Babylonians then pushed south to Jerusalem, and the first deportation of Judean leaders (among them the prophet Daniel) took place.<\/p>\n<p>Jehoiakim was permitted to continue ruling over Judah as a vassal king of Nebuchadnezzar. But his dealings with Egypt brought the emperor’s wrath down upon him. Before the Babylonians could address the Judean situation, Jehoiakim died and his son Jehoiachin was crowned. When the Babylonian forces arrived at the gates of Jerusalem, Jehoiachin and thousands of the aristocracy were taken to Babylon (2 Kgs 24:10-17). Among those deportees was Ezekiel, then about 25 years old.<\/p>\n<p>Although the book says otherwise, many scholars think that Ezekiel lived and taught in Judah for the duration of the siege and the fall of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>). They conclude this from Ezekiel’s familiarity with idolatry in the temple and his vivid descriptions of Jerusalem’s last days (Ez 8:11). Others believe that Ezekiel ministered both to the exiled community and to the Judeans living in Judah. Neither interpretation does full justice to the claims of the book itself. Ezekiel was exiled in 597 <span>BC<\/span>. He was called to bring God’s word to the deportees at Tel-abib; he was granted a vision of the horrible practices in the temple court; and he was familiar with Jerusalem and Judah from having lived there and from reports on affairs in Jerusalem coming to the exiles through messengers. Jeremiah, Ezekiel’s contemporary, was prophesying in Jerusalem, but there is no evidence that Jeremiah and Ezekiel knew of each other’s ministry. If Ezekiel had brought God’s word to Jerusalem during the siege, some reference to Jeremiah might appear in his writings. If Jeremiah was supported by Ezekiel’s ministry in Jerusalem, he probably would have included a positive word for his colleague in his book. The book of Ezekiel plainly says that Ezekiel lived and preached in exile (see 1:1-3; 11:24-25).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The prophecy of Ezekiel is easily outlined by subject matter and chronology. The chronology of the period permits a division before and after 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Jerusalem). Chapters 1–24 cover the pre-586 ministry of Ezekiel, whereas chapters 33–48 represent his post-586 ministry. Chapters 25–32 (oracles against the foreign nations) function as a transition between the book’s two major divisions.<\/p>\n<p>The book’s outline according to subject matter divides into four parts: Ezekiel’s call (1:1–3:21); prophecies of judgment against Israel (3:22–24:27); oracles against the nations (25:1–32:32); and proclamation of hope (33:1–48:35).<\/p>\n<h5>Ezekiel’s Call (1:1–3:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The prophet’s call in one sense was similar to that of Isaiah and Jeremiah. Isaiah received his mission in a vision of God’s glory in the temple (Is 6). Jeremiah was called unexpectedly in his youth, and received signs that solemnly set forth the nature of his mission (Jer 1:11-15). The call of Ezekiel combined those two elements. Revelation of God’s glory to the prophet at the same time revealed the nature of the prophet’s mission. Ezekiel’s call contained a full description of God’s glory. Isaiah briefly stated that he saw the Lord enthroned in the temple, and he concentrated on the seraphim representing and magnifying God’s glory. Ezekiel elaborated on the revelation of the Lord’s glory as well as on the ministering angels who went before the Lord as part of his royal entourage. The vision of God’s glory, though difficult to understand, is the key to the book of Ezekiel.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel, as a priest, was concerned about the future of the temple. That sacred place had been ordained by God as his home among his people. The glory, presence, and holiness of God were symbolized in the temple (see 1 Kgs 8:10-11). In exile Ezekiel could not serve his people as a priest, for they were far from Jerusalem, the city God had chosen. Against all expectations the Lord revealed himself to Ezekiel in the land of Babylon. In calling Ezekiel to a prophetic ministry, God assured his servant that he had not forsaken his people, even though they had been banished from the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet’s vision began with a storm. As a large cloud approached from the north, Ezekiel saw a brightness surrounding the cloud, four creatures, and four wheels. The combination of creatures and wheels suggests that the Lord appeared in a chariot. God’s chariot is a familiar OT representation of his coming in judgment (see Is 66:15-16). The wheels within wheels and the position of the four living creatures may signify God’s total control over the whole earth, so he could move his “chariot of judgment” in any direction. It is also possible that the living creatures with their four faces, and the wheels full of eyes, may be separate symbols showing that God sees all that happens and thereby knows the plight of the exiles. In the vision the prophet’s attention was drawn to a throne above the heads of the creatures. On the throne was “the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (1:28). In his vision of God’s coming in judgment, Ezekiel received his call to the prophetic ministry: “Son of man, I send you to the people of Israel, to a nation of rebels who have rebelled against me” (2:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). During a dark hour of Israel’s history, Ezekiel had to prophesy, rebuke his fellow exiles (3:11), and be responsible as a watchman over the house of Israel (3:17; cf. 33:1-9). Symbolic of his mission was a scroll filled with lamentations and woe (2:9-10), which when eaten became sweet as honey (3:1-3). Difficult as the mission was, God’s presence and the certain fulfillment of the prophecies sweetened Ezekiel’s task. Such encouragement was intended to take away any fear of the rebellious Israelites (2:6-7). Instead of being elated with his mission, however, Ezekiel became despondent.<\/p>\n<p>A week later, the word of the Lord came to Ezekiel to remind him of his important role as a watchman (3:16-17). Ezekiel became responsible for Israel as a nation, not just for individuals. His witness to Israel had the express aim of national repentance (vv 18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel was confined to his house by God (3:24-25). The house ministry was to be carried on only with those Israelites who sought God’s will, for the Lord had abandoned those who continued in their apostasy. The prophetic word would not help the apostates (v 26). The principle of Ezekiel’s ministry is found in 3:27: “Whenever I give you a message, I will loosen your tongue and let you speak. Then you will say to them, ‘This is what the Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span> says!’ Some of them will listen, but some will ignore you, for they are rebels” (<span>nlt<\/span>; cf. Mt 11:15; 13:43).<\/p>\n<h5>Prophecies of Judgment against Israel (3:22–24:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Symbolism figures prominently in Ezekiel’s writing. His priestly background and preparation probably suited him to receive and communicate God’s word in symbolic acts and speech. Chapters 4 and 5 contain four symbolic acts: (1) Jerusalem’s siege is portrayed on a brick (Ez 4:1-3); (2) Israel’s iniquity is represented by Ezekiel’s lying on his sides (vv 4-8); (3) Jerusalem’s grief and horror in the last days of the siege are represented by Ezekiel’s food and drink (vv 9-17); (4) Jerusalem’s fate is represented by the prophet’s hair being cut off (5:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel’s instructions were further illuminated by God’s explanation of Israel’s apostasy (5:6-7) and his judgment on Israel (vv 8-12). The judgment will last until the Israelites admit that in covenant faithfulness their Lord has inflicted righteous judgment on them (v 13).<\/p>\n<p>God would direct his judgment first against the people and the city of Jerusalem. Next in line were the mountains of Israel (ch 6) and the land (ch 7). God’s wrath included the cities and cultic sites in the hill country of Judah, leaving no protection for the people (6:3-6). Abominations that were practiced throughout the land caused God’s judgment to fall on the land as well as on the people (7:2-3, 10-11, 23). But because God is righteous, he judged the people according to their ways of life, desiring that they would once more acknowledge him as their God (7:27).<\/p>\n<p>The prophet then (chs 8–11) focused on the abominations practiced in Jerusalem, particularly idolatry in the temple courts, which caused the judgment announced in chapters 1–7. An idol had been erected in the inner court (8:3-5). By the wall of the court, elders of the city were paying homage to the idols that surrounded the court (vv 11-12). Closer to the temple, women were weeping for the god Tammuz (v 14), and men were worshiping the sun (v 16). In preparation for the ultimate judgment on the land, the prophet placed a mark on the foreheads of the few faithful Israelites so that they would survive (9:4-6). Then (ch 10), the glory of God, which had filled the temple from the time of Solomon, gradually left: “Then the glory of the <span>Lord<\/span> went up from the city and stopped above the mountain to the east” (11:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). The people, now without divine protection, were being handed over to the Babylonians (v 9).<\/p>\n<p>The message of doom for Jerusalem contains four elements of hope: restoration of the people (11:17), restoration of the land (v 17), purification of the people (v 18), and renewed fellowship between God and his people (vv 19-20). The prophet develops those four themes in chapters 33–48.<\/p>\n<p>The visions of chapters 10 and 11 made clear that when God removed his presence from Jerusalem, the exile was approaching. Those who were already in Babylon were unwilling to believe that such an extensive devastation of Jerusalem would happen or that the people would all be exiled and the land become desolate.<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel acted out the certainty of God’s word of judgment by packing his bags and showing the baggage to his fellow exiles. First, he placed the bags in the courtyard outside his modest home. Next, he went out by making a hole through the wall. Finally, the prophet walked about the settlement with his bags in full view. Skeptical observers did not understand Ezekiel and probably thought he was crazy. The believers who saw him understood. His strange actions dramatized how the king’s aides would do all they could to help King Zedekiah escape just before the fall of Jerusalem. Second Kings 25 tells how the king and his soldiers left Jerusalem for the wilderness, to be overtaken by the Babylonians at Jericho and brought before Nebuchadnezzar at Riblah. As a captive, Zedekiah witnessed the murder of his sons; then his eyes were put out, and he was sent into exile with the other Judeans (cf. Ez 12:13). The prophet’s explanation concluded with a word of comfort. Because of his covenant with Abraham, God promised not to destroy the people completely. A remnant who overcame the sword, famine, and pestilence would live to tell the story of God’s judgment (vv 15-16).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel further illustrated the nation’s plight by eating as though full of fear, depicting the great trauma that all of Judah’s inhabitants would soon undergo.<\/p>\n<p>Both symbolic acts, packing his belongings and eating, emphasized the truthfulness of God’s word. The people needed to face the nature of their God: He is magnificent, and when he speaks, his words are powerful and come to pass. Thus, the devastation of the land and the people’s exile were a fulfillment of God’s word through the prophets. The judgment was meant to produce a recognition of the Lord, repentance, and a return to God. Some in Judah doubted the efficacy of God’s prophecies, saying, “Time passes, making a liar of every prophet” (12:22). Others thought God’s word would come true in the distant future (v 27). The prevailing attitude of distrust in God’s word had been stimulated by the popular preaching of false prophets (ch 13). Never commissioned by the Lord, they deceived God’s people by lying and misdirecting them with messages of peace (vv 8-10). Wickedness, lying, and deceit were encouraged among the people by such false prophets (v 22). The magnitude of their sin and their great responsibility for Judah’s fall would be matched by the Lord’s heavy judgment. Yet God would save his people from such evil and will prepare a righteous nation with whom to maintain his covenant (v 23).<\/p>\n<p>The certainty of the judgment has been connected with the truthfulness of God’s word. Ezekiel’s difficult task of affirming the doom of Jerusalem to stubborn hearers was intensified by the people’s idolatry. Their whole way of life denied the existence of God. They practiced idolatry in their worship, and they had set up idols in their hearts (14:3). Before the covenant with God could be restored, they had to be purified from their idolatry. Even so, repentance would not guarantee immunity from judgment. Sword, famine, wild beasts, and plagues would ravage the population (v 21). After the execution of his judgment, God would take back those survivors who had turned to him for mercy. God would surely accomplish all that he intended for his people’s good (v 23).<\/p>\n<p>In chapters 15–17 Ezekiel uses three parables to set forth the apostasy, present uselessness, and judgment of Israel. Jerusalem and Judah are compared to a piece of charred wood, an adulterous woman, and a vine.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 15 reviews Jerusalem’s case. Jerusalem is compared to a piece of wood, both ends of which have been charred with fire, so that the wood is of no value. As the whole piece of wood is burned instead of being saved, so Jerusalem would undergo complete devastation (15:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 16 presents God’s case against Jerusalem from a different perspective, stressing his care for Jerusalem in the past. The beginnings of her history are compared to the birth of a female child, left abandoned by her mother (16:3-5). God adopted the child and washed and clothed her (vv 6-7). He made a covenant with her (v 8), making her his own possession. He generously gave her all the fine things of life (vv 9-13). In the height of her development, Jerusalem’s fame spread to the nations (v 14). Her self-reliance made her a spiritual prostitute as she took up the religious practices and way of life of the nations (vv 15-34). The cities of Sodom (Gn 19) and Samaria (2 Kgs 17:6), known for their immorality, are called Jerusalem’s sisters (Ez 16:46). They had been judged by God, but the corruption of those cities was little compared to the lewdness of Jerusalem (vv 48-51). Thus, Jerusalem also would surely fall and become desolate. Yet Ezekiel anticipates the judgment’s final outcome; Jerusalem will be restored to covenantal blessing (vv 62-63) after her repentance.<\/p>\n<p>The third parable (ch 17) focuses on God’s sovereignty over political developments. Assyria was no longer a power to be reckoned with. Babylon and Egypt both exercised dominion, although the balance of power was veering in favor of Babylon. Their extension of power is likened to an eagle. Nebuchadnezzar, pictured as “a great eagle with broad wings full of many-colored feathers,” took control over the affairs of Judah by removing Jehoiachin, “the highest branch of a cedar tree,” from office and by exiling him with young leaders of the Judean state (17:3-4). Ezekiel was among them. Nebuchadnezzar let the Judeans control their own affairs under Zedekiah but expected them to be subject to Babylon and not to any other power. But Judah (likened to a vine) tried to ally itself with Pharaoh Hophra of Egypt, “another great eagle with broad wings and full plumage” (v 7), against Nebuchadnezzar. Zedekiah’s folly in turning to Egypt would cause Nebuchadnezzar to pull up the vine by its roots and make it wither (vv 9-10). In explaining the parable, God told the exiles that Judah’s fall was a result of its unfaithfulness to King Nebuchadnezzar, to whom Judah owed allegiance by covenant (vv 13-18). Judah’s unfaithfulness thus extended to all of its relationships: religious, cultural, and political. After the exile, God promised, he would restore his people to their land under a Messiah, “a tender shoot” (v 22). The messianic rule is signified by the young twig, which when planted in the land will become a magnificent cedar, giving shade and protection to the birds. Chapter 17 is an inspiring affirmation of the sovereignty of God in human affairs (“All the trees will know that it is I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, who cuts down the tall tree and helps the short tree to grow tall. It is I who makes the green tree wither and gives new life to the dead tree”—17:24, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 18–22 contain Ezekiel’s oracles to Judah, its leaders, and the exiles. First, he enunciates God’s standard of righteousness: “The person who sins will be the one who dies” (18:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). The people are charging God with injustice, for they believe themselves to be under God’s judgment for the sins of their ancestors (vv 25-29). Although the Ten Commandments do say that God may punish “the sins of their parents to the third and the fourth generations” (Ex 20:5, <span>nlt<\/span>), the prophet vindicates God’s justice, telling the people that they are not being punished merely for their ancestors’ sin. Each person must be directly accountable to God; the sinner will die in wickedness, and the righteous will live by righteousness. A life of faithfulness to God’s moral and civil law will be rewarded (Ez 18:5-9). Even if one’s father was a sinner, the father’s sin is not transferable (vv 14-18). God is ready to forgive any sinner who repents (v 27). The prophet’s vindication of God’s justice becomes a call to repentance. The sinners in Judah and in exile were thus warned of the consequences of their evil, and were exhorted to return to their God and his standard of right and wrong (vv 31-32).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 19 contains two parables in the form of a lamentation. The first portrays a lioness and her two cubs. The lioness is Hamutal, the wife of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:31), who bore two sons: Jehoahaz and Zedekiah. Jehoahaz is referred to in Ezekiel 19:3-4 as a cub who grew up and was taken to Egypt (by Pharaoh Neco in 608 <span>BC<\/span>; see 2 Kgs 23:31-34). Zedekiah succeeded to the throne ten years later. In the lamentation the prophet imaginatively represents Zedekiah as a young cub who is ultimately taken to Babylon as a rebellious ruler (Ez 19:7-9). The second parable changes the imagery to a vine, representing Israel (v 10). In its early days God blessed Israel with strong rulers, but now the vine was wilting as Zedekiah irresponsibly led Judah to its last days. Ezekiel’s lamentation stresses the lack of a good candidate for the throne and the lack of life in the vine (vv 13-14).<\/p>\n<p>In chapter 20 the prophet concludes God’s argument against his people. He reviews the history of Israel’s past, starting with God’s self-revelation in Egypt (20:5-6). He took to himself a stubborn nation, tied to idolatry (v 8) and prone to apostasy (vv 13, 21). Israel wanted to be one of the great nations (v 32) instead of a sanctified people (v 12). As a result of its spiritual hardness, Israel is dispersed to live among the nations (v 35). Yet God had a solemn covenant with Israel, made by oath to the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. On the basis of that covenant, God will reach out with compassion to those who repent of their sinful ways (vv 37-44). In Israel’s judgment and restoration the nations will see the holiness of God, which does not tolerate unfaithfulness in Israel (v 41).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel’s prophecies alternate between God’s judgment on Israel’s sin and his restoration of Israel, spanning the bridge between Israel’s past and future. In view of the people’s doubts of the coming judgment on Jerusalem, he stresses the necessity of judgment and the need for repentance. Still, the future restoration of a remnant is touched upon here and there as the counterpart of his message of judgment. After announcing the fall of Jerusalem, the prophet shifts from a message of judgment to one of hope.<\/p>\n<p>The prophet returns to the proclamation of judgment in four oracles (20:45–21:32). He speaks against the Negev Desert area (20:45-49), Jerusalem and the land of Israel (21:2-17, 20-27), and against the Ammonites (vv 28-32). God permitted the sword of Nebuchadnezzar to be his instrument of judgment upon the Judeans (v 19). He would see to the judgment on the Ammonites. The Judeans would recover their previous glory, but the memory of the Ammonites would perish (vv 27, 32). The oracle against the Ammonites anticipates a larger treatise on Israel’s other neighbors: Moab, Edom, Philistia, Tyre, Sidon, and Egypt (chs 25–29).<\/p>\n<p>Chapters 22–24 contain a renewed series of indictments against Jerusalem. Jerusalem’s religious and civil leadership (the prophets, priests, and princes) are corrupt, and the people have followed their example (22:25-30). The parable of the two sisters, Oholah and Oholibah, is a variation of the parable of adulterous Jerusalem (ch 23; cf. ch 16). It differs in that the comparison drawn between Jerusalem, soon to be exiled, and Samaria, already in exile, is more explicit in the parable of Oholah and Oholibah. In chapter 16 Jerusalem was charged with greater sins than Sodom and Samaria, but was promised restoration. Only the adulterous nature of the two sisters and God’s judgment on them is emphasized in chapter 23, with no word of restoration. This parable is a fitting introduction to that of the boiling pot (ch 24), in which Jerusalem is compared to a rusty pot boiling with water. The Jerusalemites, likened to pieces of meat in the boiling pot, will die in the city. The parable was pronounced on the starting day of Nebuchadnezzar’s siege of Jerusalem. Thus, the exiles were divinely forewarned of God’s intent to destroy the temple (24:21) and were prepared for messengers bringing the bad news of Jerusalem’s fall.<\/p>\n<p>Those oracles and parables conclude the first division of the book. Ezekiel has stated God’s case against the rebellious house of Judah in many ways. His metaphors have likened Judah to a burnt piece of wood, to an uprooted vine, to a baby who grew up to be an adulteress, and to Oholibah, the adulterous woman. He has countered arguments against the fulfillment of God’s word and against the justice of God. He has reassured the exiles that God will not leave the righteous and that the future of Israel begins with a righteous remnant. The pendulum of Ezekiel’s writing has swung from judgment to restoration, while the clock was bringing Judah closer to the hour of its fall.<\/p>\n<h5>Oracles against the Nations (25:1–32:32)<\/h5>\n<p>Ammon, Moab, and Edom were Israel’s neighbors to the east. Because they were ethnically related to Israel, they were not attacked by the Israelites on their march to the Promised Land. Ammon and Moab were descendants of Lot, Abraham’s nephew, and the Edomites descended from Esau, the brother of Jacob. Although God forbade war with them, relations between Israel and its eastern neighbors were always tense. Israel had been overrun by the Ammonites for a time, and Israel was never successful in controlling the Edomites’ competitive trade relations. Those neighboring nations joined the Babylonian attack against Jerusalem and rejoiced when Jerusalem fell and the temple was devastated (Ez 25:3-12). They were ready to take over and loot Judah’s cities, and to instigate trouble in a time when Jerusalem was distressed. Therefore, says Ezekiel, God’s judgment will also extend to Ammon, Moab, and Edom (vv 4-14).<\/p>\n<p>The Philistines had been Israel’s enemy to the southwest. During the period of the judges and the united monarchy, the Philistines had controlled much of Israel’s territory. King David successfully limited the Philistine threat by confining them to their own territory. But in Ezekiel’s day they were still considered Israel’s “everlasting” enemy (25:15), possibly intensified by Philistine support of the Babylonian invasion of Judah.<\/p>\n<p>The city of Tyre had received reports of the overthrow of Jerusalem and was ready to exploit the opportunity for its own advantage (26:2). Tyre’s trade position was unrivaled; its ships crossed the seas to exchange goods with many distant lands (Ez 27). But Tyre would soon be broken by the Babylonians, its wealth dried up with the destruction of the fleet and the murder of its sailors (27:26).<\/p>\n<p>The prince of Tyre is singled out in chapter 28, but verse 12 refers to the “king” of Tyre. Interpreters disagree whether they are one person or two. Those who distinguish between the two understand the prince of Tyre to be the ruler of that city, but they consider the “king” of Tyre to represent Satan (28:13-15). The Garden of Eden with all its splendor is an appropriate setting for the original glory of an angelic Satan before his fall. But there is no reason within the context to distinguish between the prince and the king of Tyre. Each is said to have exalted himself, and both took authority over men as if they were gods and enjoyed all the splendor and royalty that belong to God. And both prince and king fall from their high position. The passage is a magnificent example of Ezekiel’s literary ability. He draws a glorious picture of the Garden of Eden, reworking the same theme as he depicts the glory and fall of the king of Tyre. Ezekiel presents him as a cherub, in accordance with the local belief that the king was divine. He wore the finest clothing, with nine kinds of precious stones (v 13). Though God had elevated him to the royal throne (vv 13-14), the king’s heart turned to materialism and to religious and judicial corruption (vv 16-18). In a sense the king (prince) represents the people of Tyre. They were all guilty of corruption, injustice, and violence. If God judged his covenant people for their perversion of justice and for their sins, his judgment would surely come also on the city of Tyre (vv 18-19). When the Babylonians marched on Tyre, they laboriously built a jetty from the mainland to the city. At the same time Tyrian ships loaded with goods and treasures sailed out across the Mediterranean, so that when Nebuchadnezzar’s troops finally breached the walls, little loot could be taken (29:18).<\/p>\n<p>The city of Sidon also cheered Jerusalem’s destruction. Sidon was a port city in Phoenicia, to the north of Tyre. By pestilence and war, the inhabitants of Sidon would learn the justice of Israel’s God.<\/p>\n<p>Six nations (Ammon, Moab, Edom, Philistia, Tyre, and Sidon) scorned Israel at the fall of Jerusalem. Because God had invested his holiness in the temple of Jerusalem and in his people, the temple’s destruction and the people’s exile signified to the nations that Israel’s God was impotent. They did not realize that the reason for Israel’s fate was God’s intolerance of his people’s sin. God’s holiness required the punishment of sin, and it also required vindication for his name (28:22-23). God was still concerned for his people, that Israel might know he had removed the scorn of their neighbors (v 24). In the restoration of Israel the Lord would further manifest his holiness before the nations. Israel would receive back the land, vineyards, and houses, and would enjoy the bounty of the Lord in peace (vv 25-26).<\/p>\n<p>Egypt had convinced the people of Israel and Judah that with its help the Assyrians and the Babylonians could not stand their ground in Palestine. In 722 <span>BC<\/span> the Assyrian troops took the northern capital of Samaria, and in 586 the Babylonians conquered Jerusalem, while Egypt remained passive. The Egyptians had desired control over Palestine for economic reasons, but not at the expense of their own welfare. Egypt, too, would lose its leadership under God’s judgment (29:9-16). Reduced to dependence on foreign powers, Egypt would no longer be a stumbling block for Israel. First, Babylonia was permitted to break Egypt’s power (23:1–32:21); later, the Persians, Greeks, and Romans would incorporate Egypt as a province. The fall of Egypt coincided with the fall of several great and small kingdoms: Assyria (32:22-23), Elam (vv 24-25), Meshech and Tubal (vv 26-28), Edom (v 29), and Sidon (v 30).<\/p>\n<h5>Proclamation of Hope (33:1–48:35)<\/h5>\n<p>After the visions of God’s judgment on the surrounding nations, Ezekiel returns to the future hope of Israel. In the first major section of his book he dealt with the reasons for Judah’s exile and the destruction of the temple, alluding often to the future of Israel. But the prophet’s organization of his material included, between prophecies of Israel’s judgment and restoration, the oracles of God’s judgment on Israel’s neighbors who had encouraged and rejoiced in its fall. Throughout its history Israel had allowed foreign nations to influence its religion, culture, and form of government. The reduction of their powers meant Israel, restored to the Promised Land, would be more free for faithfulness to God. Before taking up the theme of the restoration, Ezekiel reviews the emphases of chapters 1–24: (1) He was called to be a watchman over Israel (33:1-9; cf. 1:1–3:21). (2) Israel had sinned against the Lord and had to receive a righteous judgment (33:10). (3) Jerusalem was to be taken by the Babylonians (v 21). (4) Israel’s repentance is necessary for restoration (vv 11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Thus far, his ministry had not met with success. The exiles who had heard his messages were full of appreciation for Ezekiel’s rhetorical and literary abilities (33:32). They readily accepted Ezekiel as a watchman who warned the people of the impending catastrophe at Jerusalem, and they may have admitted that their sin was the reason for God’s judgment on Israel and Jerusalem. But they were slow in applying the prophetic word to their own lives. God was ready to forgive their sins if they repented, acknowledged him, and demonstrated their renewed spirit by practicing the law of God (v 32). Now that the news of Jerusalem had been reported to the exiles (v 21), the necessity for the people to act responsibly was even more urgent. The Lord had demonstrated that Ezekiel was a true prophet (v 33).<\/p>\n<p>The success of Ezekiel’s ministry was not measured in numbers. He faithfully declared the word of God in word, sign, and parable. The exiles had followed the false hopes proclaimed by false “shepherds” who had fattened themselves at the expense of the flock (34:2-3). They did not take care of those in need (v 4), and they allowed the flock to be scattered (vv 5-6). God promised his people that he would be the faithful shepherd, bring the sheep together, feed them, and care for them (34:11-15; cf. Ps 23). God would also distinguish between the sheep and the goats, to find out whose hearts were right with him, so that the true sheep could be restored to God’s flock (Ez 34:20-22). God’s promise included the restoration of the land and the restoration of the divinely appointed Davidic dynasty (v 24). The renewed fellowship between the Lord and Israel under the messianic ruler would be sealed with a new covenant, the “covenant of peace.” That covenant assured the people of God’s blessing on their labor, bringing them abundant harvests (vv 26-27). The people would not be forced to fight against nature in their pursuits (vv 25-28). They would not have to struggle against other peoples who might try to share in their blessings by force (vv 27-29). The prophetic vision telescoped the events of the restoration of Israel after the exile, the coming of Jesus the Messiah (cf. Jn 10), and the full restoration of the sin-cursed world.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 34 is the key to the messages of restoration. The emphases include the outworking of the frequently repeated verse “They will truly be my people, and I will be their God” (11:20; cf. 34:30; 36:28). The most significant aspects of the restoration theme include: (1) God’s gracious restoration of his people to covenant blessing (36:20-36; 37:23-26; 39:25); (2) God’s restoration of the nation of Israel to the land (36:1-15, 24; 37:14-23; 39:27); (3) God’s new covenant, giving his Spirit to his people (36:25-27; 37:14; 39:29), and his blessing on his people (36:8-12, 29-38; 39:9-10, 26), assuring them of victory over their enemies (35:1-15; 36:36; 37:28; 38:1–39:24); (4) God’s appointment of a Davidic king, the Messiah, over his people (37:24-25); and (5) God’s temple restored among his people (37:26-27).<\/p>\n<h6>The People of God<\/h6>\n<p>The rejection of the exiles did not last forever. Based on the Abrahamic covenant, the Lord promised to bless the faithful remnant and to make of them a new people. The imagery of a valley of dry bones is particularly fitting. The dry bones represent God’s people without hope (37:11). Ezekiel proclaims to them the good news that God will renew and restore them (v 12). The Lord’s purpose for his people is that all the nations may honor his holy name through his people (39:7, 25-27).<\/p>\n<h6>The Land<\/h6>\n<p>The promise also extends to the land, originally given to Abraham and his descendants. The Abrahamic covenant included a messianic element, for through the family of Abraham living in the Promised Land all nations would receive God’s blessing (Gn 12:3). In a vision Ezekiel saw the boundaries and described the division of the land (Ez 47–48). The royal city of Jerusalem is the central symbol of God’s presence among his people; its name will be “The Lord is there” (48:8-35).<\/p>\n<h6>The New Covenant<\/h6>\n<p>The Abrahamic covenant is renewed, a gracious covenant that expresses the restored relationship. “Covenant of peace” fittingly describes its nature and benefits. The restless people of God are promised rest from their searching, their enemies, and their toil. The change in relationship is further emphasized by God’s sending of his Spirit, who will add a new dimension to the lifestyle of his people. Obedience to God will no longer be constrained, for God’s Spirit helps his people to do his will. A new heart, controlled by the Spirit of God, is given to the Lord’s people (36:26-27). The presence of the Spirit also signifies a new life for the people (37:14; see Jn 3:8, 16; Acts 2:38; Rom 8:2-4, 15).<\/p>\n<h6>The Messiah<\/h6>\n<p>The OT hope of a messianic king is crystallized in Ezekiel’s message. His rule will be everlasting (Ez 37:25), over all God’s people who have new hearts (vv 15-25).<\/p>\n<h6>The Temple<\/h6>\n<p>As a priest, Ezekiel remained keenly interested in the temple, priesthood, sacrificial regulations, and festivals. A large section of the prophecy’s last division describes the temple’s revived worship (40:1–46:24). His vision of the glory of God, so important in the messages of God’s judgment on Jerusalem (chs 1, 10–11), now assures the remnant that God did not forsake his people (43:2-5). He will dwell among them, for the temple is a symbol of God’s presence (37:27). Some interpreters believe that the temple, with its ritual as described in Ezekiel 40–46, will be restored in the messianic era before the last judgment. Others believe the promises about the temple provide a positive symbolic answer to Ezekiel’s greatest concern: whether God will return to be with his people (48:35; see Jn 2:21; Rv 21:22).<\/p>\n\n<p>There are various interpretations of chapters 34–48. As a watchman to Israel, Ezekiel had a message for the exiled Jewish community. Thus the prophecy’s fulfillment must have begun with the decree of Cyrus I (538 <span>BC<\/span>) permitting the Jews to return to their land (Ezr 1:1-3). Two rival schools of interpretation exist on how the prophecy is fulfilled beyond Israel’s restoration to the land. Those who interpret Israel as simply the nation view the modern return of Jewish people to the land of Israel as a continuation of God’s prophetic promise. They believe that God’s plan for Israel is being fulfilled along with, and in addition to, his plan for the Christian church. The fulfillment of those prophecies will be inaugurated by the coming of the messianic king, who will give earthly peace to the Jewish people. The temple worship (Ez 40–48) will be restored in some way during the period of the messianic kingdom. The church will enjoy a small share in all the events centered on the Jews. The promises of Ezekiel’s vision are thus limited to the nation of Israel and must be fulfilled before the coming of a new heaven and earth.<\/p>\n<p>Other interpreters believe that Ezekiel wrote for the benefit of spiritual descendants of Abraham who believe, as Abraham did, in God’s promises (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:11-13; Gal 3:6-9, 29). All who have faith like Abraham, whether Jews or Gentiles, are regarded as Abraham’s offspring (Gal 3:28-29). Ezekiel’s message thus would include all of God’s gracious work among Christian Gentiles, who have become the recipients of God’s promises and benefits. It is possible, on the basis of 1 Peter 1:10-11, to interpret Ezekiel’s language as a prophetic expression of how God’s grace would come to all those who become reconciled to God through faith in the gospel.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Ezekiel (Person); Prophecy.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EZEKIEL, Book of Prophetic book of the OT, originating in the time of the Babylonian exile. Preview • Author • Date and Background • Content Author Ezekiel was the son of Buzi (1:3), a member of a priestly family. It is unclear whether he actually served in the temple as a priest, but such was his training. His writings show that he knew the regulations for sacrifices, the rituals, and the people’s expectations of a priest. In exile Ezekiel the priest spoke God’s word about the future of the ...","summary_en":"EZEKIEL, Book of Prophetic book of the OT, originating in the time of the Babylonian exile. Preview • Author • Date and Background • Content Author Ezekiel was the son of Buzi (1:3), a member of a priestly family. It is unclear whether he actually served in the temple as a priest, but such was his training. His writings show that he knew the regulations for sacrifices, the rituals, and the people’s expectations of a priest. In exile Ezekiel the priest spoke God’s word about the future of the ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":12004,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Family Life and Relations","title_en":"Family Life and Relations","content_ro":"<h3>FAMILY LIFE AND RELATIONS<\/h3>\n<p>In Bible times, the family comprised members of a household, including not only parents and children, along with other relatives and concubines, but also servants, travelers, aliens, and anyone else who happened to be within the house and was therefore under the protection of the head of the family. The family of Jacob, for example, comprised three generations (Gn 46:8-26). Biblically, the term “family” is interchangeable with “house,” and “founding a house” can refer to setting up a separate dwelling as well as establishing a family. In the broader sense, “house” may refer to an entire nation (“house of Israel”). The heads of families returning from Babylon in the postexilic period controlled sometimes several hundred family members (Ezr 8:1-14). The family was a smaller part of a clan and tribe. In nomadic times the responsibilities and allegiances centered on the larger family group.<\/p>\n<p>Those who belonged to the clan knew that they had to work for common interests and accept responsibility for the whole group. All members of the family were to be protected and assisted in time of need.<\/p>\n<p>As the life of the Israelites became more settled, families (in the wider sense of the term) lived in villages surrounded by fields of wheat, barley, and flax, with areas of grazing land for sheep and goats. Each group of villages consisted of an intermarried, interdependent family group, such as that of the Danites of Zorah and Eshtaol (Jgs 18:11). The hard life of those days demanded a sharing of work and the loyal cooperation of the entire family for survival.<\/p>\n<p>As crafts and trades developed, along with a more sedentary lifestyle, sons learned their fathers’ skills and continued the family trade. Consequently, the whole village might follow a particular craft (1 Chr 4:14; Neh 11:35). By specializing in such trades, however, the villagers became less self-sufficient, depending more on farmers for food and on other specialized villages for the production of cloth or pottery (1 Chr 4:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>With the growth of cities, related groups lived together in specific areas. Many members of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah were listed in the census of Jerusalem by Nehemiah (Neh 11:4-8), and by the writer of Chronicles (1 Chr 9:3-9). One consequence of life in the cities was the fragmentation of the family group. As the bonds of the wider family were loosened, the unit consisted increasingly of a husband and wife with their children, living in one house. The size of houses that have been excavated precludes the idea of any larger family unit as the norm in OT societies.<\/p>\n<p>During the kingdom period, King David’s sons Amnon and Absalom set up their own separate houses (2 Sm 13:7-8, 20). At that time there were few slaves in Hebrew society, but they also were considered members of the family. As bonds of the wider family loosened, and the master of the household lost a degree of authority, the society became one in which the king was sovereign and all the people were his subjects.<\/p>\n<p>The early kings of Israel promoted such a change in order to establish a central ruling authority for the entire country. The king’s subjects fell broadly into the categories of employers and employees, corresponding to the rich and poor of society. By the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, members of the wider family no longer worked for the communal good under the authority of the clan’s head; rather, individuals worked primarily for the good of their own immediate family. Hence one’s labor and devotion were focused more narrowly, and the greatest beneficiary was the king, the personal symbol of the nation.<\/p>\n<p>Emphasis on the smaller family unit increased, and old duties that had been willingly accepted by the wider groups in former times came to be neglected. People did not always help relatives in times of need, and they frequently had to be reminded of their obligations, particularly toward widows and orphans (Is 1:17; Jer 7:6). Family feuds also declined because members no longer felt responsible to take vengeance as a way to uphold the honor of the clan (2 Sm 3:27; 16:8; 2 Kgs 9:26). Nevertheless, Nehemiah expected Israelites to fight for their family honor (Neh 4:14). In NT times, the family was such a unit that it could be sold for a debt incurred by one of its members (Mt 18:25).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew religion’s emphasis on family participation in certain celebrations strengthened the small unit. The Passover, for example, was always celebrated as a family thanksgiving meal (Ex 12:3-4, 46). The prophet Samuel’s parents made a traditional annual pilgrimage to the shrine at Shiloh (1 Sm 2:19). In modern times, a young Jewish boy’s arrival at the threshold of manhood is celebrated with the Bar Mitzvah ceremony. Being so honored in the midst of a religious family preserves the ancient Hebrew tradition of family participation in religious ceremonies.<\/p>\n<p>In his preaching Jesus used the family as a symbol for the relationship of God to his people (Mt 19:14; 23:9; Lk 8:21). From the cross he handed over responsibility for the care of his mother to his disciple John (Jn 19:27).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times, the communion meals in the Jerusalem church took place by households (Acts 2:46). Early Christian meetings were held in the homes of believers because of opposition by the authorities. The book of Acts contains examples of entire families being converted to Christianity (Acts 10:24, 44-48; 16:15, 31-32). Timothy learned the gospel from his grandmother and mother (2 Tm 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Status of Family Members<\/p>\n<p>• Marital Security<\/p>\n<p>• Position of Children<\/p>\n<p>• The Rights of Children<\/p>\n<p>• Daily Life of the Hebrew Family<\/p>\n<p>• In New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"StatusofFamilyMembers\">Status of Family Members<\/p>\n<p>From nomadic times, a father’s authority held the family group together in their encampment, and he became the symbol of their security. In ancient patriarchal societies, the father was an absolute master who had the power of life and death over family members, ruling with unchallenged authority. Although he had extensive responsibilities for those under his care, his power was awesome and his status unquestioned.<\/p>\n<p>A man’s possessions included his wife, servants, slaves, and animals (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21). In fact, the phrase “to marry a wife” comes from a Hebrew root meaning “to become the master of a wife.” A husband was as much the master of his wife as he was of his home or his fields. Consequently, the wife addressed him in a subservient manner, as a slave would address a master (Gn 18:12; Jgs 19:26). This low status for a woman extended to a daughter’s position in the ancient household. Females were always under the authority of a male relative: first, the father; then a husband. If a woman became a widow, she was subject to her husband’s nearest male relative, who became her “redeemer.” The bride price (Gn 29:18, 27; Ex 22:16-17; 1 Sm 18:25; 2 Sm 3:14) paid by her husband was not exactly a purchase of the woman from her father, but the exchange of money did stigmatize her. The amount of a bride price depended on the father’s status (Gn 34:12). The usual price was probably 20 to 30 shekels of silver. The bride received gifts of jewelry, ornaments, and clothing from her future husband, and she occasionally enjoyed some sort of financial or material return from the bride price for her own use (Jos 15:19; Jgs 1:15). When her father or husband died, the money frequently reverted to her.<\/p>\n<p>An engaged woman was considered her fiancé’s property just as much as if she were already married to him (Dt 22:23-27). The woman left her own family at marriage, to live with and become part of her new husband’s family. Normally, any succeeding marriages would be with members of that family.<\/p>\n<p>Despite the low legal status of the mother of the family, her life was not as bad as one might suppose. She was the legal wife, not an unpaid servant, and she frequently took a strong role as adviser to her husband in family affairs. Her most important function, aside from childbearing, was organization of the household, of which she was generally the respected manager. Even though the wife might have been acquired through capture in war (Dt 21:10-14), she could not be sold as a slave or daughter could (Ex 21:7; Neh 5:5).<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, her position was precarious, in that she could be disowned or divorced by her husband as the result of a simple renunciation: “She is no longer my wife, and I am no longer her husband.” Perhaps he had found fault with her culinary skills, or possibly he was casting his eyes on another woman. In any event, a husband knew that if his wife did not obey even a signal or a glance, he was within his rights to obtain a divorce (cf. Ecclus 25:26). The wife, however, obtained a certain degree of protection in the letter of repudiation, by which her freedom was formally restored. Under Jewish tradition, a wife could not divorce her husband.<\/p>\n<p>In matters of domestic protocol, the Hebrew wife was not introduced to her husband’s guests, a tradition that subsequently led to considerable embarrassment for Abraham’s wife, Sarah, and for Rebekah (Gn 20:16). A woman normally remained veiled in public (24:65; 38:14; Is 47:2).<\/p>\n<p>The imagery in Proverbs 19:13 and 27:15 draws a vigorous comparison between a contentious woman and water dripping from a leaky roof. The OT leaves little doubt about the type of behavior expected from a woman. She was expected to be charming, soft-spoken, discreet, and calm (Prv 9:13; 11:16, 22; 21:9). She was also to be responsible, well-organized, intelligent, thoughtful, reverent, and a good manager of both the household and the family purse (31:10-31). A woman should also be pious and beautiful, and in NT tradition, submissive to her husband, as befitted a woman adorned with the priceless jewel of a gentle and quiet spirit (Ti 2:4-5; 1 Pt 3:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The actions of a few women whose roles in life do not seem to fit the pattern of the meek, passive female pictured above, are recorded in the Bible and the Apocrypha. The books of Judith and Esther recount heroic tales of how national fortunes were saved by women. Deborah and Jael were renowned heroines (Jgs 4–5), and the kingdom of Judah was ruled by a vicious woman, Athaliah, for several years (2 Kgs 11). The women who stepped to the forefront of public life were exceptional and few in number. Judith was a rich widow, an unusual thing in Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MaritalSecurity\">Marital Security<\/p>\n<p>The security of a wife’s position improved considerably when she produced her first child, particularly if it was a son. A woman’s primary duty to her husband and his family was procreation (Gn 1:28; 9:1), and until she gave birth to a son, she feared displacement by a second wife or a concubine. Polygamous marriages were by no means rare, especially in wealthy families. They resulted in two ill-defined family groups, controlled by the mothers but under the overall authority of fathers; there were inevitable jealousies and frictions.<\/p>\n<p>The legal status of a woman was consistently poor in Bible times. With no evidence at all, a husband could accuse his wife of adultery, and she was compelled to face a trial by ordeal. She had to abase herself by taking an oath, eating dust and a cereal offering, and drinking bitter water. A priest, meanwhile, made pronouncements regarding the dire results that would come to her if she were guilty: she would become an outcast with no hope of survival. But if she maintained her serenity, and if her thigh did not rot nor her abdomen swell, she was considered to have “proved” her innocence. In such an event she would go free, and her husband bore no blame whatsoever for his false accusation (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\n<p>If a woman took a vow, it was legal only as long as her father or husband approved it. If she became a widow, the vow still remained in force and could be used against her (Nm 30:3-15).<\/p>\n<p>A woman in Israel was always under the protection of a male, be it her father, grandfather, great-grandfather, brother, husband, or some other member of her husband’s family. She had few legal rights and, in contrast to Babylonian traditions, could not inherit at her husband’s death. It is small wonder that widows were classed with orphans and the poor. A childless widow could on occasion return to her father’s family (Gn 38:11; Lv 22:13; Ru 1:8), thus becoming subject again to the authority of her father. A Hebrew widow could also remain with her late husband’s family. She would then come under the protection of her “redeemer,” a male relative of her husband’s family who assumed responsibility for her. If a husband died leaving a woman childless, it was the responsibility of the husband’s brother to marry her. The first son born of such a union was then regarded as the heir of the first husband.<\/p>\n<p>It was normal for a brother to accept the obligation for such a marriage (levirate). It could be refused on various grounds, but such refusal was considered dishonorable, for it was a man’s duty to perpetuate his brother’s name and to safeguard the family fortune.<\/p>\n<p>A redeemer’s responsibilities were considerable. In addition to the marriage, he was perhaps involved in avenging the family reputation, and he had to ensure that family property increased and remained within family control.<\/p>\n<p>If an Israelite fell into debt and was forced to sell himself into slavery, he would normally be “redeemed” by one of his relatives (Lv 25:47-49). If in his penury an Israelite had to sell his land or his house, the redeemer had the right of first refusal over all other prospective purchasers. It was as much his duty as his right to prevent family property from passing into the hands of strangers (v 25). The prophet Jeremiah bought his cousin Hanamel’s field under similar circumstances (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most familiar OT story of a childless widow, her “redeemer,” and their levirate marriage is recorded in the book of Ruth. One of Naomi’s two sons married Ruth. When Ruth was widowed, her impoverished mother-in-law, Naomi, left her home in Moab and returned to Bethlehem to sell some of the family property. Although a close relative was prepared to buy the land and keep it in the family, he was not ready to marry Ruth as well (Ru 3:12; 4:4). He knew that a son of that union would be deemed a son of the deceased, bearing the dead husband’s name, and thus ultimately inheriting the land (4:4-6). The next relative in order of kinship was Boaz, who became Ruth’s “redeemer.” He was prepared to accept the double obligation of purchasing the land and marrying Ruth (4:9-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PositionofChildren\">Position of Children<\/p>\n<p>Children were generally well loved, but their childhood was short and they were often regarded as laborers for the house or fields. According to the law of primogeniture, the eldest son received a double portion of the estate as his birthright (Dt 21:17). Thus, he was assured of the position of family head. Even during his father’s lifetime, the eldest son took precedence over his brothers and sisters (Gn 43:33). Where twins were born, the first to emerge from the womb was considered the elder, with all the attendant privileges (25:24-26; 38:27-30).<\/p>\n<p>For a serious offense, the eldest son could lose the right of primogeniture (Gn 35:22; 49:3-4; 1 Chr 5:1), or it could be surrendered voluntarily, as Esau did by selling his birthright to his brother Jacob (Gn 25:29-34). There was a law protecting the eldest son from his father’s favoritism for a younger brother (Dt 21:15-17). Nevertheless, King David gave his kingdom to Solomon, his youngest son (1 Kgs 2:15).<\/p>\n<p>In a family with no sons, a daughter could inherit property (Nm 27:8). Frequently, parents consulted neither sons nor daughters when marriage partners were arranged for them. Marriage was often an alliance or contract between two families, and thus the wishes and concerns of individuals were considered unimportant. Love matches were few, although occasionally a son would marry in defiance of his parents, as Esau did (Gn 26:34-35). Although it was rare for young people to express their feelings and preferences about marriage in an open fashion, Saul’s daughter, Michal, made known her love for David (1 Sm 18:20).<\/p>\n<p>There is no record of legal adoption among the Hebrews, but it was practiced from ancient times in Mesopotamia. It was especially useful as a means of ensuring a childless couple that their land would be tilled and that they would be cared for in their old age. All examples of adoption mentioned in the OT took place outside the land of Israel (Ex 2:10; 1 Kgs 11:20; Est 2:7, 15) and are not examples of true adoption as a lifetime member of a family.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRightsofChildren\">The Rights of Children<\/p>\n<p>The nature of patriarchal society made for unfortunate distinctions between male and female children. The position of a daughter, who could be sold into slavery or sold to be the concubine of a man and then possibly sold again (Ex 21:7-11), was certainly inferior to that of a son. In the patriarchal period, however, both a son and a daughter could be put to death for disobeying the head of the family. One’s children could also be sacrificed in worship rituals (see Gn 22; Jgs 11). It is probable that infant sacrifice was practiced by nations neighboring Israel, including Canaan and Ammon.<\/p>\n<p>The rights of children were improved considerably with the promulgation of the code of Mosaic law. A father was no longer permitted to put his child to death without referring the case to the elders (Dt 21:18-21). Both sons and daughters could be brought before such authorities and accused of being disobedient, gluttonous, or drunkards. A father’s absolute authority even extended to his married son and family if they were living under his roof. The law also prohibited children from being held responsible for the crimes of their parents (Dt 24:16). In King David’s time a person convicted by the community had the right of appeal to the king (2 Sm 14:4-11).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew families both parents were held in high respect. Honor had to be given to both mother and father (Ex 20:12), and the law condemned offenses against either parent (21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 21:18; 27:16). Respect due to the mother is a recurrent theme in the Wisdom Literature (Prv 19:26; 20:20; cf. Ecclus 3:1-16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DailyLifeoftheHebrewFamily\">Daily Life of the Hebrew Family<\/p>\n<p>In the everyday affairs of a Hebrew household, it was the father’s responsibility to maintain the family fortune and to be the provider. He might work in the fields, most probably with crops of flax, barley, or wheat. Or he would work at a trade, possibly as a weaver, builder, potter, dyer, fuller, or a worker in copper or bronze. If he lived near the shore, he might be a fisherman.<\/p>\n<p>The father was also responsible for the religious well-being of the family. It was his duty to take over his sons’ education from the mother at an early age, teaching them the tenets of Hebrew religion (Ex 10:2; 12:26; Dt 4:9; 6:7). He also explained all the facets of the law and the interwoven history of the nation.<\/p>\n<p>The father was the disciplinarian of the family, with the rod being used to drive home the lessons taught (Prv 13:24; 22:15; 29:15-17). Though children were loved and valued, they were not pampered (Ecclus 30:9-12). In postexilic times education also took place within the precincts of the synagogue, and shortly before the time of Christ, a general elementary education was introduced. It was also imperative that a father teach his sons a trade, normally his own, for a man without a trade either starved or became a thief. Another important paternal responsibility was to provide wives for male offspring in the household.<\/p>\n<p>The mother was responsible for her sons’ and daughters’ early education (Prv 1:8; 6:20), teaching them religious songs and prayers as soon as they could talk. A father took over the education of his sons, but the mother continued with the daughters, training them to spin, weave, cook, clean, trim the lamps, and generally to become competent in all the household duties (31:13-31).<\/p>\n<p>With little furniture, keeping a house clean meant sweeping the floors to keep them free from dust and dirt. Cooking was at once simple and difficult. It was simple in that much of the food was cooked in the form of a soup or stew, or else made into a cake and cooked on a griddle. It was difficult in that the corn had to be ground by hand and bread was baked daily.<\/p>\n<p>A mother was expected to take wool, card it, spin it, and often weave and make clothes for her family. In addition, she would help her husband in the fields at harvesttime. Because many families had one or more olive trees, a few grapevines, and fig trees, the mother would also assist in picking the fruit. She would sometimes work at the press when the olives or grapes were being processed. Frequently the treading of grapes in the family vat would be done together by husband and wife. Drawing water from the well was considered a menial task and was generally the wife’s responsibility, although sometimes it was assigned to the children (Gn 24:15-16).<\/p>\n<p>As in all societies, there was a time when children laughed and played together (Zec 8:5; Mt 11:16), although childhood and adolescence were not recognized as specific stages of development. Children were considered as sucklings if under three, but were regarded as boys or girls when they were able to take care of themselves. A small child sat on his mother’s lap and was played with (Is 66:12). There is no evidence of organized sports for children. Toys, including whistles, rattles, dolls, and miniature cooking utensils, have been excavated at Palestinian sites.<\/p>\n<p>As soon as a boy was old enough, he took his place in the family and accepted his appointed task. Among other things, children were expected to gather fuel (Jer 7:18). Young boys and girls tended the flocks. The sheep had to be protected from marauding wild beasts, guarded against their own folly when they wandered near crevices, steered toward good pasture and water, and carried home when sick or injured (Gn 29:6; Ex 2:16). The care of cattle was also the responsibility of children (1 Sm 16:11). Of necessity, boys were trained in the various arts of war.<\/p>\n<p>Children sometimes joined their fathers in the fields, and their presence was always welcome. From earliest times, boys in particular would watch their fathers until they too picked up a tool or implement to try their skill; girls watched and learned from their mothers. Young children frequently listened to the talk of the elders at the city gates or in the villages. A visit to a sanctuary at festival time was a family affair, furnishing an ideal learning experience. As a child, Jesus accompanied his parents, Mary and Joseph, to the temple in Jerusalem (Lk 2:42-47).<\/p>\n<p>Young girls were surprisingly free to go about their appointed tasks. They were not secluded or veiled and could visit uninhibited with friends and neighbors (Gn 34:1). They were also able to converse with men without embarrassment (24:15-25; 29:11-12; 1 Sm 9:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>Mealtimes were strictly family times. It is doubtful whether a meal comparable to a breakfast was eaten, and a farmer would probably have a light lunch in the fields. The main meal of the day was prepared by the mother, and it would be eaten in the early evening. Although the variety of food available was limited, its preparation was time-consuming.<\/p>\n<p>Feast times were periods of great religious significance and were also the days when family members participated in the symbolic rituals of their faith. Among the Israelites several kinds of food were fundamental to their religious ritual. Family unity and the national religion were molded together by special meals in the home.<\/p>\n<p>Daylight played an important part in the daily habits of the people in antiquity. Although oil lamps were readily available in later periods, it was customary to rise with the sun and go to bed relatively soon after dark. The wife would probably be up before sunrise and might continue her labor after dark.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InNewTestamentTimes\">In New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>By NT times, for those who followed the Greek and Roman style, life became more elegant. Despite that, the status of many family members did not change substantially. Wealthier families had more slaves, and the children were more likely to have formal education, sometimes spending less effort on family chores. Even in Roman times, however, the father still had a legal right to accept or reject his child.<\/p>\n<p>The status of the woman had definitely improved by the NT period. A Roman matron was highly respected and exerted a strong influence over her husband. She was not sequestered in a particular section of the house, as a Greek woman was, but managed and supervised tasks in any part of her home. She helped her husband in business, had her own place in theaters, games, and religious festivals, and sometimes managed her own property. Palestinian women began to enjoy a new status and dignity as the result of Jesus’ attitude toward women and its influence on the early Christian church.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Education; Marriage, Marriage Customs; Sex, Sexuality; Widow; Woman.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FAMILY LIFE AND RELATIONS<\/h3>\n<p>In Bible times, the family comprised members of a household, including not only parents and children, along with other relatives and concubines, but also servants, travelers, aliens, and anyone else who happened to be within the house and was therefore under the protection of the head of the family. The family of Jacob, for example, comprised three generations (Gn 46:8-26). Biblically, the term “family” is interchangeable with “house,” and “founding a house” can refer to setting up a separate dwelling as well as establishing a family. In the broader sense, “house” may refer to an entire nation (“house of Israel”). The heads of families returning from Babylon in the postexilic period controlled sometimes several hundred family members (Ezr 8:1-14). The family was a smaller part of a clan and tribe. In nomadic times the responsibilities and allegiances centered on the larger family group.<\/p>\n<p>Those who belonged to the clan knew that they had to work for common interests and accept responsibility for the whole group. All members of the family were to be protected and assisted in time of need.<\/p>\n<p>As the life of the Israelites became more settled, families (in the wider sense of the term) lived in villages surrounded by fields of wheat, barley, and flax, with areas of grazing land for sheep and goats. Each group of villages consisted of an intermarried, interdependent family group, such as that of the Danites of Zorah and Eshtaol (Jgs 18:11). The hard life of those days demanded a sharing of work and the loyal cooperation of the entire family for survival.<\/p>\n<p>As crafts and trades developed, along with a more sedentary lifestyle, sons learned their fathers’ skills and continued the family trade. Consequently, the whole village might follow a particular craft (1 Chr 4:14; Neh 11:35). By specializing in such trades, however, the villagers became less self-sufficient, depending more on farmers for food and on other specialized villages for the production of cloth or pottery (1 Chr 4:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>With the growth of cities, related groups lived together in specific areas. Many members of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah were listed in the census of Jerusalem by Nehemiah (Neh 11:4-8), and by the writer of Chronicles (1 Chr 9:3-9). One consequence of life in the cities was the fragmentation of the family group. As the bonds of the wider family were loosened, the unit consisted increasingly of a husband and wife with their children, living in one house. The size of houses that have been excavated precludes the idea of any larger family unit as the norm in OT societies.<\/p>\n<p>During the kingdom period, King David’s sons Amnon and Absalom set up their own separate houses (2 Sm 13:7-8, 20). At that time there were few slaves in Hebrew society, but they also were considered members of the family. As bonds of the wider family loosened, and the master of the household lost a degree of authority, the society became one in which the king was sovereign and all the people were his subjects.<\/p>\n<p>The early kings of Israel promoted such a change in order to establish a central ruling authority for the entire country. The king’s subjects fell broadly into the categories of employers and employees, corresponding to the rich and poor of society. By the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, members of the wider family no longer worked for the communal good under the authority of the clan’s head; rather, individuals worked primarily for the good of their own immediate family. Hence one’s labor and devotion were focused more narrowly, and the greatest beneficiary was the king, the personal symbol of the nation.<\/p>\n<p>Emphasis on the smaller family unit increased, and old duties that had been willingly accepted by the wider groups in former times came to be neglected. People did not always help relatives in times of need, and they frequently had to be reminded of their obligations, particularly toward widows and orphans (Is 1:17; Jer 7:6). Family feuds also declined because members no longer felt responsible to take vengeance as a way to uphold the honor of the clan (2 Sm 3:27; 16:8; 2 Kgs 9:26). Nevertheless, Nehemiah expected Israelites to fight for their family honor (Neh 4:14). In NT times, the family was such a unit that it could be sold for a debt incurred by one of its members (Mt 18:25).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew religion’s emphasis on family participation in certain celebrations strengthened the small unit. The Passover, for example, was always celebrated as a family thanksgiving meal (Ex 12:3-4, 46). The prophet Samuel’s parents made a traditional annual pilgrimage to the shrine at Shiloh (1 Sm 2:19). In modern times, a young Jewish boy’s arrival at the threshold of manhood is celebrated with the Bar Mitzvah ceremony. Being so honored in the midst of a religious family preserves the ancient Hebrew tradition of family participation in religious ceremonies.<\/p>\n<p>In his preaching Jesus used the family as a symbol for the relationship of God to his people (Mt 19:14; 23:9; Lk 8:21). From the cross he handed over responsibility for the care of his mother to his disciple John (Jn 19:27).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times, the communion meals in the Jerusalem church took place by households (Acts 2:46). Early Christian meetings were held in the homes of believers because of opposition by the authorities. The book of Acts contains examples of entire families being converted to Christianity (Acts 10:24, 44-48; 16:15, 31-32). Timothy learned the gospel from his grandmother and mother (2 Tm 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Status of Family Members<\/p>\n<p>• Marital Security<\/p>\n<p>• Position of Children<\/p>\n<p>• The Rights of Children<\/p>\n<p>• Daily Life of the Hebrew Family<\/p>\n<p>• In New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"StatusofFamilyMembers\">Status of Family Members<\/p>\n<p>From nomadic times, a father’s authority held the family group together in their encampment, and he became the symbol of their security. In ancient patriarchal societies, the father was an absolute master who had the power of life and death over family members, ruling with unchallenged authority. Although he had extensive responsibilities for those under his care, his power was awesome and his status unquestioned.<\/p>\n<p>A man’s possessions included his wife, servants, slaves, and animals (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21). In fact, the phrase “to marry a wife” comes from a Hebrew root meaning “to become the master of a wife.” A husband was as much the master of his wife as he was of his home or his fields. Consequently, the wife addressed him in a subservient manner, as a slave would address a master (Gn 18:12; Jgs 19:26). This low status for a woman extended to a daughter’s position in the ancient household. Females were always under the authority of a male relative: first, the father; then a husband. If a woman became a widow, she was subject to her husband’s nearest male relative, who became her “redeemer.” The bride price (Gn 29:18, 27; Ex 22:16-17; 1 Sm 18:25; 2 Sm 3:14) paid by her husband was not exactly a purchase of the woman from her father, but the exchange of money did stigmatize her. The amount of a bride price depended on the father’s status (Gn 34:12). The usual price was probably 20 to 30 shekels of silver. The bride received gifts of jewelry, ornaments, and clothing from her future husband, and she occasionally enjoyed some sort of financial or material return from the bride price for her own use (Jos 15:19; Jgs 1:15). When her father or husband died, the money frequently reverted to her.<\/p>\n<p>An engaged woman was considered her fiancé’s property just as much as if she were already married to him (Dt 22:23-27). The woman left her own family at marriage, to live with and become part of her new husband’s family. Normally, any succeeding marriages would be with members of that family.<\/p>\n<p>Despite the low legal status of the mother of the family, her life was not as bad as one might suppose. She was the legal wife, not an unpaid servant, and she frequently took a strong role as adviser to her husband in family affairs. Her most important function, aside from childbearing, was organization of the household, of which she was generally the respected manager. Even though the wife might have been acquired through capture in war (Dt 21:10-14), she could not be sold as a slave or daughter could (Ex 21:7; Neh 5:5).<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, her position was precarious, in that she could be disowned or divorced by her husband as the result of a simple renunciation: “She is no longer my wife, and I am no longer her husband.” Perhaps he had found fault with her culinary skills, or possibly he was casting his eyes on another woman. In any event, a husband knew that if his wife did not obey even a signal or a glance, he was within his rights to obtain a divorce (cf. Ecclus 25:26). The wife, however, obtained a certain degree of protection in the letter of repudiation, by which her freedom was formally restored. Under Jewish tradition, a wife could not divorce her husband.<\/p>\n<p>In matters of domestic protocol, the Hebrew wife was not introduced to her husband’s guests, a tradition that subsequently led to considerable embarrassment for Abraham’s wife, Sarah, and for Rebekah (Gn 20:16). A woman normally remained veiled in public (24:65; 38:14; Is 47:2).<\/p>\n<p>The imagery in Proverbs 19:13 and 27:15 draws a vigorous comparison between a contentious woman and water dripping from a leaky roof. The OT leaves little doubt about the type of behavior expected from a woman. She was expected to be charming, soft-spoken, discreet, and calm (Prv 9:13; 11:16, 22; 21:9). She was also to be responsible, well-organized, intelligent, thoughtful, reverent, and a good manager of both the household and the family purse (31:10-31). A woman should also be pious and beautiful, and in NT tradition, submissive to her husband, as befitted a woman adorned with the priceless jewel of a gentle and quiet spirit (Ti 2:4-5; 1 Pt 3:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The actions of a few women whose roles in life do not seem to fit the pattern of the meek, passive female pictured above, are recorded in the Bible and the Apocrypha. The books of Judith and Esther recount heroic tales of how national fortunes were saved by women. Deborah and Jael were renowned heroines (Jgs 4–5), and the kingdom of Judah was ruled by a vicious woman, Athaliah, for several years (2 Kgs 11). The women who stepped to the forefront of public life were exceptional and few in number. Judith was a rich widow, an unusual thing in Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MaritalSecurity\">Marital Security<\/p>\n<p>The security of a wife’s position improved considerably when she produced her first child, particularly if it was a son. A woman’s primary duty to her husband and his family was procreation (Gn 1:28; 9:1), and until she gave birth to a son, she feared displacement by a second wife or a concubine. Polygamous marriages were by no means rare, especially in wealthy families. They resulted in two ill-defined family groups, controlled by the mothers but under the overall authority of fathers; there were inevitable jealousies and frictions.<\/p>\n<p>The legal status of a woman was consistently poor in Bible times. With no evidence at all, a husband could accuse his wife of adultery, and she was compelled to face a trial by ordeal. She had to abase herself by taking an oath, eating dust and a cereal offering, and drinking bitter water. A priest, meanwhile, made pronouncements regarding the dire results that would come to her if she were guilty: she would become an outcast with no hope of survival. But if she maintained her serenity, and if her thigh did not rot nor her abdomen swell, she was considered to have “proved” her innocence. In such an event she would go free, and her husband bore no blame whatsoever for his false accusation (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\n<p>If a woman took a vow, it was legal only as long as her father or husband approved it. If she became a widow, the vow still remained in force and could be used against her (Nm 30:3-15).<\/p>\n<p>A woman in Israel was always under the protection of a male, be it her father, grandfather, great-grandfather, brother, husband, or some other member of her husband’s family. She had few legal rights and, in contrast to Babylonian traditions, could not inherit at her husband’s death. It is small wonder that widows were classed with orphans and the poor. A childless widow could on occasion return to her father’s family (Gn 38:11; Lv 22:13; Ru 1:8), thus becoming subject again to the authority of her father. A Hebrew widow could also remain with her late husband’s family. She would then come under the protection of her “redeemer,” a male relative of her husband’s family who assumed responsibility for her. If a husband died leaving a woman childless, it was the responsibility of the husband’s brother to marry her. The first son born of such a union was then regarded as the heir of the first husband.<\/p>\n<p>It was normal for a brother to accept the obligation for such a marriage (levirate). It could be refused on various grounds, but such refusal was considered dishonorable, for it was a man’s duty to perpetuate his brother’s name and to safeguard the family fortune.<\/p>\n<p>A redeemer’s responsibilities were considerable. In addition to the marriage, he was perhaps involved in avenging the family reputation, and he had to ensure that family property increased and remained within family control.<\/p>\n<p>If an Israelite fell into debt and was forced to sell himself into slavery, he would normally be “redeemed” by one of his relatives (Lv 25:47-49). If in his penury an Israelite had to sell his land or his house, the redeemer had the right of first refusal over all other prospective purchasers. It was as much his duty as his right to prevent family property from passing into the hands of strangers (v 25). The prophet Jeremiah bought his cousin Hanamel’s field under similar circumstances (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most familiar OT story of a childless widow, her “redeemer,” and their levirate marriage is recorded in the book of Ruth. One of Naomi’s two sons married Ruth. When Ruth was widowed, her impoverished mother-in-law, Naomi, left her home in Moab and returned to Bethlehem to sell some of the family property. Although a close relative was prepared to buy the land and keep it in the family, he was not ready to marry Ruth as well (Ru 3:12; 4:4). He knew that a son of that union would be deemed a son of the deceased, bearing the dead husband’s name, and thus ultimately inheriting the land (4:4-6). The next relative in order of kinship was Boaz, who became Ruth’s “redeemer.” He was prepared to accept the double obligation of purchasing the land and marrying Ruth (4:9-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PositionofChildren\">Position of Children<\/p>\n<p>Children were generally well loved, but their childhood was short and they were often regarded as laborers for the house or fields. According to the law of primogeniture, the eldest son received a double portion of the estate as his birthright (Dt 21:17). Thus, he was assured of the position of family head. Even during his father’s lifetime, the eldest son took precedence over his brothers and sisters (Gn 43:33). Where twins were born, the first to emerge from the womb was considered the elder, with all the attendant privileges (25:24-26; 38:27-30).<\/p>\n<p>For a serious offense, the eldest son could lose the right of primogeniture (Gn 35:22; 49:3-4; 1 Chr 5:1), or it could be surrendered voluntarily, as Esau did by selling his birthright to his brother Jacob (Gn 25:29-34). There was a law protecting the eldest son from his father’s favoritism for a younger brother (Dt 21:15-17). Nevertheless, King David gave his kingdom to Solomon, his youngest son (1 Kgs 2:15).<\/p>\n<p>In a family with no sons, a daughter could inherit property (Nm 27:8). Frequently, parents consulted neither sons nor daughters when marriage partners were arranged for them. Marriage was often an alliance or contract between two families, and thus the wishes and concerns of individuals were considered unimportant. Love matches were few, although occasionally a son would marry in defiance of his parents, as Esau did (Gn 26:34-35). Although it was rare for young people to express their feelings and preferences about marriage in an open fashion, Saul’s daughter, Michal, made known her love for David (1 Sm 18:20).<\/p>\n<p>There is no record of legal adoption among the Hebrews, but it was practiced from ancient times in Mesopotamia. It was especially useful as a means of ensuring a childless couple that their land would be tilled and that they would be cared for in their old age. All examples of adoption mentioned in the OT took place outside the land of Israel (Ex 2:10; 1 Kgs 11:20; Est 2:7, 15) and are not examples of true adoption as a lifetime member of a family.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRightsofChildren\">The Rights of Children<\/p>\n<p>The nature of patriarchal society made for unfortunate distinctions between male and female children. The position of a daughter, who could be sold into slavery or sold to be the concubine of a man and then possibly sold again (Ex 21:7-11), was certainly inferior to that of a son. In the patriarchal period, however, both a son and a daughter could be put to death for disobeying the head of the family. One’s children could also be sacrificed in worship rituals (see Gn 22; Jgs 11). It is probable that infant sacrifice was practiced by nations neighboring Israel, including Canaan and Ammon.<\/p>\n<p>The rights of children were improved considerably with the promulgation of the code of Mosaic law. A father was no longer permitted to put his child to death without referring the case to the elders (Dt 21:18-21). Both sons and daughters could be brought before such authorities and accused of being disobedient, gluttonous, or drunkards. A father’s absolute authority even extended to his married son and family if they were living under his roof. The law also prohibited children from being held responsible for the crimes of their parents (Dt 24:16). In King David’s time a person convicted by the community had the right of appeal to the king (2 Sm 14:4-11).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew families both parents were held in high respect. Honor had to be given to both mother and father (Ex 20:12), and the law condemned offenses against either parent (21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 21:18; 27:16). Respect due to the mother is a recurrent theme in the Wisdom Literature (Prv 19:26; 20:20; cf. Ecclus 3:1-16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DailyLifeoftheHebrewFamily\">Daily Life of the Hebrew Family<\/p>\n<p>In the everyday affairs of a Hebrew household, it was the father’s responsibility to maintain the family fortune and to be the provider. He might work in the fields, most probably with crops of flax, barley, or wheat. Or he would work at a trade, possibly as a weaver, builder, potter, dyer, fuller, or a worker in copper or bronze. If he lived near the shore, he might be a fisherman.<\/p>\n<p>The father was also responsible for the religious well-being of the family. It was his duty to take over his sons’ education from the mother at an early age, teaching them the tenets of Hebrew religion (Ex 10:2; 12:26; Dt 4:9; 6:7). He also explained all the facets of the law and the interwoven history of the nation.<\/p>\n<p>The father was the disciplinarian of the family, with the rod being used to drive home the lessons taught (Prv 13:24; 22:15; 29:15-17). Though children were loved and valued, they were not pampered (Ecclus 30:9-12). In postexilic times education also took place within the precincts of the synagogue, and shortly before the time of Christ, a general elementary education was introduced. It was also imperative that a father teach his sons a trade, normally his own, for a man without a trade either starved or became a thief. Another important paternal responsibility was to provide wives for male offspring in the household.<\/p>\n<p>The mother was responsible for her sons’ and daughters’ early education (Prv 1:8; 6:20), teaching them religious songs and prayers as soon as they could talk. A father took over the education of his sons, but the mother continued with the daughters, training them to spin, weave, cook, clean, trim the lamps, and generally to become competent in all the household duties (31:13-31).<\/p>\n<p>With little furniture, keeping a house clean meant sweeping the floors to keep them free from dust and dirt. Cooking was at once simple and difficult. It was simple in that much of the food was cooked in the form of a soup or stew, or else made into a cake and cooked on a griddle. It was difficult in that the corn had to be ground by hand and bread was baked daily.<\/p>\n<p>A mother was expected to take wool, card it, spin it, and often weave and make clothes for her family. In addition, she would help her husband in the fields at harvesttime. Because many families had one or more olive trees, a few grapevines, and fig trees, the mother would also assist in picking the fruit. She would sometimes work at the press when the olives or grapes were being processed. Frequently the treading of grapes in the family vat would be done together by husband and wife. Drawing water from the well was considered a menial task and was generally the wife’s responsibility, although sometimes it was assigned to the children (Gn 24:15-16).<\/p>\n<p>As in all societies, there was a time when children laughed and played together (Zec 8:5; Mt 11:16), although childhood and adolescence were not recognized as specific stages of development. Children were considered as sucklings if under three, but were regarded as boys or girls when they were able to take care of themselves. A small child sat on his mother’s lap and was played with (Is 66:12). There is no evidence of organized sports for children. Toys, including whistles, rattles, dolls, and miniature cooking utensils, have been excavated at Palestinian sites.<\/p>\n<p>As soon as a boy was old enough, he took his place in the family and accepted his appointed task. Among other things, children were expected to gather fuel (Jer 7:18). Young boys and girls tended the flocks. The sheep had to be protected from marauding wild beasts, guarded against their own folly when they wandered near crevices, steered toward good pasture and water, and carried home when sick or injured (Gn 29:6; Ex 2:16). The care of cattle was also the responsibility of children (1 Sm 16:11). Of necessity, boys were trained in the various arts of war.<\/p>\n<p>Children sometimes joined their fathers in the fields, and their presence was always welcome. From earliest times, boys in particular would watch their fathers until they too picked up a tool or implement to try their skill; girls watched and learned from their mothers. Young children frequently listened to the talk of the elders at the city gates or in the villages. A visit to a sanctuary at festival time was a family affair, furnishing an ideal learning experience. As a child, Jesus accompanied his parents, Mary and Joseph, to the temple in Jerusalem (Lk 2:42-47).<\/p>\n<p>Young girls were surprisingly free to go about their appointed tasks. They were not secluded or veiled and could visit uninhibited with friends and neighbors (Gn 34:1). They were also able to converse with men without embarrassment (24:15-25; 29:11-12; 1 Sm 9:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>Mealtimes were strictly family times. It is doubtful whether a meal comparable to a breakfast was eaten, and a farmer would probably have a light lunch in the fields. The main meal of the day was prepared by the mother, and it would be eaten in the early evening. Although the variety of food available was limited, its preparation was time-consuming.<\/p>\n<p>Feast times were periods of great religious significance and were also the days when family members participated in the symbolic rituals of their faith. Among the Israelites several kinds of food were fundamental to their religious ritual. Family unity and the national religion were molded together by special meals in the home.<\/p>\n<p>Daylight played an important part in the daily habits of the people in antiquity. Although oil lamps were readily available in later periods, it was customary to rise with the sun and go to bed relatively soon after dark. The wife would probably be up before sunrise and might continue her labor after dark.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InNewTestamentTimes\">In New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>By NT times, for those who followed the Greek and Roman style, life became more elegant. Despite that, the status of many family members did not change substantially. Wealthier families had more slaves, and the children were more likely to have formal education, sometimes spending less effort on family chores. Even in Roman times, however, the father still had a legal right to accept or reject his child.<\/p>\n<p>The status of the woman had definitely improved by the NT period. A Roman matron was highly respected and exerted a strong influence over her husband. She was not sequestered in a particular section of the house, as a Greek woman was, but managed and supervised tasks in any part of her home. She helped her husband in business, had her own place in theaters, games, and religious festivals, and sometimes managed her own property. Palestinian women began to enjoy a new status and dignity as the result of Jesus’ attitude toward women and its influence on the early Christian church.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Education; Marriage, Marriage Customs; Sex, Sexuality; Widow; Woman.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FAMILY LIFE AND RELATIONS In Bible times, the family comprised members of a household, including not only parents and children, along with other relatives and concubines, but also servants, travelers, aliens, and anyone else who happened to be within the house and was therefore under the protection of the head of the family. The family of Jacob, for example, comprised three generations (Gn 46:8-26). Biblically, the term “family” is interchangeable with “house,” and “founding a house” can refe...","summary_en":"FAMILY LIFE AND RELATIONS In Bible times, the family comprised members of a household, including not only parents and children, along with other relatives and concubines, but also servants, travelers, aliens, and anyone else who happened to be within the house and was therefore under the protection of the head of the family. The family of Jacob, for example, comprised three generations (Gn 46:8-26). Biblically, the term “family” is interchangeable with “house,” and “founding a house” can refe...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24428,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Marketplace Market","title_en":"Marketplace Market","content_ro":"<h3>MARKET, MARKETPLACE<\/h3>\n<p>Place for the buying and selling of goods in antiquity. Generally, the marketplaces of the ancient Near East would be much like the open air bazaars one can still see in any city throughout Israel, Greece, and Turkey.<\/p>\n<p>The marketplace of NT times known as the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agora<\/span> was a place for buying and selling goods (Mk 7:4); a place for children to play (Mt 11:16; Lk 7:32); a place for idlers and for men seeking work (Mt 20:3); a place where public events, including healings, occurred (Mk 6:56); the center of public life and debate (Acts 17:17); and a place where trials were held (16:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MARKET, MARKETPLACE<\/h3>\n<p>Place for the buying and selling of goods in antiquity. Generally, the marketplaces of the ancient Near East would be much like the open air bazaars one can still see in any city throughout Israel, Greece, and Turkey.<\/p>\n<p>The marketplace of NT times known as the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agora<\/span> was a place for buying and selling goods (Mk 7:4); a place for children to play (Mt 11:16; Lk 7:32); a place for idlers and for men seeking work (Mt 20:3); a place where public events, including healings, occurred (Mk 6:56); the center of public life and debate (Acts 17:17); and a place where trials were held (16:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"MARKET, MARKETPLACE Place for the buying and selling of goods in antiquity. Generally, the marketplaces of the ancient Near East would be much like the open air bazaars one can still see in any city throughout Israel, Greece, and Turkey. The marketplace of NT times known as the agora was a place for buying and selling goods (Mk 7:4); a place for children to play (Mt 11:16; Lk 7:32); a place for idlers and for men seeking work (Mt 20:3); a place where public events, including healings, occurre...","summary_en":"MARKET, MARKETPLACE Place for the buying and selling of goods in antiquity. Generally, the marketplaces of the ancient Near East would be much like the open air bazaars one can still see in any city throughout Israel, Greece, and Turkey. The marketplace of NT times known as the agora was a place for buying and selling goods (Mk 7:4); a place for children to play (Mt 11:16; Lk 7:32); a place for idlers and for men seeking work (Mt 20:3); a place where public events, including healings, occurre...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54701,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:16","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:16-19<\/strong> John’s prophetic message is represented by <em>funeral songs<\/em>—he didn’t drink wine and he often fasted (11:18; see 3:4). Jesus’ message is seen in <em>wedding songs<\/em> and in <em>feasts and drinks<\/em> (see 9:9-17). In both cases, <em>this generation<\/em> responds to God’s messenger with indifference and rejection.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:16-19<\/strong> John’s prophetic message is represented by <em>funeral songs<\/em>—he didn’t drink wine and he often fasted (11:18; see 3:4). Jesus’ message is seen in <em>wedding songs<\/em> and in <em>feasts and drinks<\/em> (see 9:9-17). In both cases, <em>this generation<\/em> responds to God’s messenger with indifference and rejection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:16-19 John’s prophetic message is represented by funeral songs—he didn’t drink wine and he often fasted (11:18; see 3:4). Jesus’ message is seen in wedding songs and in feasts and drinks (see 9:9-17). In both cases, this generation responds to God’s messenger with indifference and rejection.","summary_en":"11:16-19 John’s prophetic message is represented by funeral songs—he didn’t drink wine and he often fasted (11:18; see 3:4). Jesus’ message is seen in wedding songs and in feasts and drinks (see 9:9-17). In both cases, this generation responds to God’s messenger with indifference and rejection.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82327,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:16","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:16-19<\/strong> John’s prophetic message is represented by <em>funeral songs<\/em>—he didn’t drink wine and he often fasted (11:18; see 3:4). Jesus’ message is seen in <em>wedding songs<\/em> and in <em>feasts and drinks<\/em> (see 9:9-17). In both cases, <em>this generation<\/em> responds to God’s messenger with indifference and rejection.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:16-19<\/strong> John’s prophetic message is represented by <em>funeral songs<\/em>—he didn’t drink wine and he often fasted (11:18; see 3:4). Jesus’ message is seen in <em>wedding songs<\/em> and in <em>feasts and drinks<\/em> (see 9:9-17). In both cases, <em>this generation<\/em> responds to God’s messenger with indifference and rejection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:16-19 John’s prophetic message is represented by funeral songs—he didn’t drink wine and he often fasted (11:18; see 3:4). Jesus’ message is seen in wedding songs and in feasts and drinks (see 9:9-17). In both cases, this generation responds to God’s messenger with indifference and rejection.","summary_en":"11:16-19 John’s prophetic message is represented by funeral songs—he didn’t drink wine and he often fasted (11:18; see 3:4). Jesus’ message is seen in wedding songs and in feasts and drinks (see 9:9-17). In both cases, this generation responds to God’s messenger with indifference and rejection.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":109953,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:16","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:16-19<\/strong> John’s prophetic message is represented by <em>funeral songs<\/em>—he didn’t drink wine and he often fasted (11:18; see 3:4). Jesus’ message is seen in <em>wedding songs<\/em> and in <em>feasts and drinks<\/em> (see 9:9-17). In both cases, <em>this generation<\/em> responds to God’s messenger with indifference and rejection.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:16-19<\/strong> John’s prophetic message is represented by <em>funeral songs<\/em>—he didn’t drink wine and he often fasted (11:18; see 3:4). Jesus’ message is seen in <em>wedding songs<\/em> and in <em>feasts and drinks<\/em> (see 9:9-17). In both cases, <em>this generation<\/em> responds to God’s messenger with indifference and rejection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:16-19 John’s prophetic message is represented by funeral songs—he didn’t drink wine and he often fasted (11:18; see 3:4). Jesus’ message is seen in wedding songs and in feasts and drinks (see 9:9-17). In both cases, this generation responds to God’s messenger with indifference and rejection.","summary_en":"11:16-19 John’s prophetic message is represented by funeral songs—he didn’t drink wine and he often fasted (11:18; see 3:4). Jesus’ message is seen in wedding songs and in feasts and drinks (see 9:9-17). In both cases, this generation responds to God’s messenger with indifference and rejection.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137579,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:16","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:16-19<\/strong> John’s prophetic message is represented by <em>funeral songs<\/em>—he didn’t drink wine and he often fasted (11:18; see 3:4). Jesus’ message is seen in <em>wedding songs<\/em> and in <em>feasts and drinks<\/em> (see 9:9-17). In both cases, <em>this generation<\/em> responds to God’s messenger with indifference and rejection.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:16-19<\/strong> John’s prophetic message is represented by <em>funeral songs<\/em>—he didn’t drink wine and he often fasted (11:18; see 3:4). Jesus’ message is seen in <em>wedding songs<\/em> and in <em>feasts and drinks<\/em> (see 9:9-17). In both cases, <em>this generation<\/em> responds to God’s messenger with indifference and rejection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:16-19 John’s prophetic message is represented by funeral songs—he didn’t drink wine and he often fasted (11:18; see 3:4). Jesus’ message is seen in wedding songs and in feasts and drinks (see 9:9-17). In both cases, this generation responds to God’s messenger with indifference and rejection.","summary_en":"11:16-19 John’s prophetic message is represented by funeral songs—he didn’t drink wine and he often fasted (11:18; see 3:4). Jesus’ message is seen in wedding songs and in feasts and drinks (see 9:9-17). In both cases, this generation responds to God’s messenger with indifference and rejection.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65138,"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":92764,"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":120390,"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":148016,"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}],"17":[{"id":12896,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Funeral Customs","title_en":"Funeral Customs","content_ro":"<h3>FUNERAL CUSTOMS<\/h3>\n<p>Practices and rites that encompass the dying and death of human beings. Funerary rites have been practiced by all social groups from their very beginnings.<\/p>\n<p>Most anthropologists believe that funeral customs fulfill certain important social functions for the living. However, the general meaning these customs provide for any given culture is a matter of longstanding dispute. On the one hand, some behavioral scientists believe that funeral rites alleviate the sudden anxiety that death brings for the grieving. On the other hand, some believe that the purpose of death customs is not to dispel anxiety but rather to foster the feelings of religious awe or group solidarity. In varying degrees both of these factors probably underlie most funeral rites. Funerary customs remind the participants that death must be taken seriously, while at the same time they provide a comforting interpretation of death.<\/p>\n\n<p>Belief patterns have profoundly influenced funeral customs. A conception of immortality is one of the more commonly held beliefs. The discovery of artifacts such as tools, ornaments, and even food in the oldest known human graves may be evidence of the pervasive conviction that human beings continue to exist in some form after death. Proper funeral rites were believed to assist the dead in reaching their final habitat, which usually included a journey fraught with various perils, such as crossing mythical rivers or wide chasms. The rites also assured the living that the spirits of the dead would not harm them.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DisposingoftheCorpse\">Disposing of the Corpse<\/p>\n<p>A common form of disposing of a corpse has been burial in the earth (inhumation). This practice may have emerged because of the belief that the abode of the dead was located under the ground. Often the grave was considered the entrance to the underworld, although some groups considered the habitation of the dead to be in the sky. Above-ground disposal has also been practiced by many. Some communities place the corpse on a rack to be devoured by birds or other animals. A few groups have been known to eat the corpse, believing that the good qualities of the deceased could be ingested. Many Asian societies have traditionally practiced cremation, or the burning of the corpse. In the past, it was not uncommon for the wife and slaves of a deceased man to throw themselves on the burning pyre. Cremation is becoming popular in the West and may become more widely practiced because of the increasing scarcity of land for grave sites.<\/p>\n<p>Nearly every society observes special mourning customs during the disposal of the body. These include the wearing of special clothing, emotional outbursts, seclusion, and food taboos. Most societies mark the experience by a ceremony that may include purification rites and the sharing of special meals by the friends and relatives of the dead. In almost every cultural group, status symbols infiltrate the funeral customs and rituals. For instance, if the deceased were of a high social standing, then the funeral ceremonies would be more elaborate.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FuneralCustomsandtheBible\">Funeral Customs and the Bible<\/p>\n<p>While the Bible does not provide a detailed picture of burial procedures, it does allude to the common burial practices of the Hebrew people and contains some scattered prohibitions relating to death. Placing the corpse in the ground or in a cave was the principal method for disposing of the dead. One of the worst indignities was to be left unburied or become food for predators (Dt 28:26; 1 Kgs 11:15). If possible, the deceased were to be buried on the day of death (Dt 21:23). While embalming was not practiced, the corpse was dressed in special burial clothes and sprinkled with various perfumes (Mk 15:46; Jn 11:44).<\/p>\n<p>Intense weeping surrounded funerary rites during biblical times. This mourning did not simply result from spontaneous grief but was part of the funeral ritual (Mt 11:17). In ancient Israel, groups of paid mourners emerged who could wail on ritual cue. Much of the funeral service centered on these professional mourners who sang psalms and delivered elaborate eulogies for the dead (2 Chr 35:25; Jer 9:17-22). The emphasis upon mourning resulted from the Hebrew appreciation of human life and health, which was considered one of God’s greatest gifts (Ps 91:16), and also from a view of human nature that affirmed embodied existence (16:9-11). This latter belief may have contributed to the OT’s lack of a full-fledged doctrine of immortality, even though it implies that the dead partake in the “shadowy existence” of Sheol and will someday be resurrected (Jb 14:13; Ez 37).<\/p>\n<p>The early Christian church affirmed the Jewish belief in embodied existence but highlighted a belief in existence after death. Unlike the Greek dualists, who asserted the immortality of only the soul, the NT writers, following the OT, emphasized a belief in eternal life that entailed not only the soul but also the body. This view became the fulcrum for the belief in the bodily resurrection, which undergirded Christian funeral customs. Nearly every practice symbolized a belief in the resurrection and eternal life. Thus, the emphasis upon lamentation gave way to joyful singing of psalms. The body was washed, anointed with perfumes and spices, wrapped in linen, and surrounded by candles, all of which represented eternal life. Friends and relatives usually held a vigil at the home of the deceased, and scriptural passages dealing with the resurrection and eternal life were read. Whenever possible, the Lord’s Supper was observed, symbolizing the sacrifice of Christ. At the church or the grave site, a funeral oration was delivered both to eulogize the dead and to comfort the living. Many of these practices are still observed by Christians today.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Burial, Burial Customs; Mourning.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FUNERAL CUSTOMS<\/h3>\n<p>Practices and rites that encompass the dying and death of human beings. Funerary rites have been practiced by all social groups from their very beginnings.<\/p>\n<p>Most anthropologists believe that funeral customs fulfill certain important social functions for the living. However, the general meaning these customs provide for any given culture is a matter of longstanding dispute. On the one hand, some behavioral scientists believe that funeral rites alleviate the sudden anxiety that death brings for the grieving. On the other hand, some believe that the purpose of death customs is not to dispel anxiety but rather to foster the feelings of religious awe or group solidarity. In varying degrees both of these factors probably underlie most funeral rites. Funerary customs remind the participants that death must be taken seriously, while at the same time they provide a comforting interpretation of death.<\/p>\n\n<p>Belief patterns have profoundly influenced funeral customs. A conception of immortality is one of the more commonly held beliefs. The discovery of artifacts such as tools, ornaments, and even food in the oldest known human graves may be evidence of the pervasive conviction that human beings continue to exist in some form after death. Proper funeral rites were believed to assist the dead in reaching their final habitat, which usually included a journey fraught with various perils, such as crossing mythical rivers or wide chasms. The rites also assured the living that the spirits of the dead would not harm them.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DisposingoftheCorpse\">Disposing of the Corpse<\/p>\n<p>A common form of disposing of a corpse has been burial in the earth (inhumation). This practice may have emerged because of the belief that the abode of the dead was located under the ground. Often the grave was considered the entrance to the underworld, although some groups considered the habitation of the dead to be in the sky. Above-ground disposal has also been practiced by many. Some communities place the corpse on a rack to be devoured by birds or other animals. A few groups have been known to eat the corpse, believing that the good qualities of the deceased could be ingested. Many Asian societies have traditionally practiced cremation, or the burning of the corpse. In the past, it was not uncommon for the wife and slaves of a deceased man to throw themselves on the burning pyre. Cremation is becoming popular in the West and may become more widely practiced because of the increasing scarcity of land for grave sites.<\/p>\n<p>Nearly every society observes special mourning customs during the disposal of the body. These include the wearing of special clothing, emotional outbursts, seclusion, and food taboos. Most societies mark the experience by a ceremony that may include purification rites and the sharing of special meals by the friends and relatives of the dead. In almost every cultural group, status symbols infiltrate the funeral customs and rituals. For instance, if the deceased were of a high social standing, then the funeral ceremonies would be more elaborate.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FuneralCustomsandtheBible\">Funeral Customs and the Bible<\/p>\n<p>While the Bible does not provide a detailed picture of burial procedures, it does allude to the common burial practices of the Hebrew people and contains some scattered prohibitions relating to death. Placing the corpse in the ground or in a cave was the principal method for disposing of the dead. One of the worst indignities was to be left unburied or become food for predators (Dt 28:26; 1 Kgs 11:15). If possible, the deceased were to be buried on the day of death (Dt 21:23). While embalming was not practiced, the corpse was dressed in special burial clothes and sprinkled with various perfumes (Mk 15:46; Jn 11:44).<\/p>\n<p>Intense weeping surrounded funerary rites during biblical times. This mourning did not simply result from spontaneous grief but was part of the funeral ritual (Mt 11:17). In ancient Israel, groups of paid mourners emerged who could wail on ritual cue. Much of the funeral service centered on these professional mourners who sang psalms and delivered elaborate eulogies for the dead (2 Chr 35:25; Jer 9:17-22). The emphasis upon mourning resulted from the Hebrew appreciation of human life and health, which was considered one of God’s greatest gifts (Ps 91:16), and also from a view of human nature that affirmed embodied existence (16:9-11). This latter belief may have contributed to the OT’s lack of a full-fledged doctrine of immortality, even though it implies that the dead partake in the “shadowy existence” of Sheol and will someday be resurrected (Jb 14:13; Ez 37).<\/p>\n<p>The early Christian church affirmed the Jewish belief in embodied existence but highlighted a belief in existence after death. Unlike the Greek dualists, who asserted the immortality of only the soul, the NT writers, following the OT, emphasized a belief in eternal life that entailed not only the soul but also the body. This view became the fulcrum for the belief in the bodily resurrection, which undergirded Christian funeral customs. Nearly every practice symbolized a belief in the resurrection and eternal life. Thus, the emphasis upon lamentation gave way to joyful singing of psalms. The body was washed, anointed with perfumes and spices, wrapped in linen, and surrounded by candles, all of which represented eternal life. Friends and relatives usually held a vigil at the home of the deceased, and scriptural passages dealing with the resurrection and eternal life were read. Whenever possible, the Lord’s Supper was observed, symbolizing the sacrifice of Christ. At the church or the grave site, a funeral oration was delivered both to eulogize the dead and to comfort the living. Many of these practices are still observed by Christians today.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Burial, Burial Customs; Mourning.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FUNERAL CUSTOMS Practices and rites that encompass the dying and death of human beings. Funerary rites have been practiced by all social groups from their very beginnings. Most anthropologists believe that funeral customs fulfill certain important social functions for the living. However, the general meaning these customs provide for any given culture is a matter of longstanding dispute. On the one hand, some behavioral scientists believe that funeral rites alleviate the sudden anxiety that d...","summary_en":"FUNERAL CUSTOMS Practices and rites that encompass the dying and death of human beings. Funerary rites have been practiced by all social groups from their very beginnings. Most anthropologists believe that funeral customs fulfill certain important social functions for the living. However, the general meaning these customs provide for any given culture is a matter of longstanding dispute. On the one hand, some behavioral scientists believe that funeral rites alleviate the sudden anxiety that d...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":26634,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Music","title_en":"Music","content_ro":"<h3>MUSIC<\/h3>\n<p>A natural human expression that probably began with speech-singing and developed into songs, which were then accompanied by instruments. Music as we know it has become quite complex, a luxury and entertainment; music in antiquity, however, was a functional expression of daily life, work, and worship.<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “sing to the Lord,” common to the OT (Ex 15:21; 1 Chr 16:9; Pss 68:32; 96:1-2; Is 42:10; Jer 20:13), was not unique to the Jewish nation. All religions draw on the natural human impulse to sing. The injunction “sing to the Lord” was a signal for the people to pour out their praise in song.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible, however, is limited in its treatment of music in ancient Israel. Since there was no written musical notation, the primary record of songs sung by the Hebrews is the collection of texts, particularly the psalms, and a few enigmatic musical instructions. The biblical writers were writing a history not of their culture but of their relationship with God; hence, their comments about music are not critical. Also, the biblical documents cover a long span of history and are grouped according to category rather than in chronological order, thus making it difficult to order the development of musical style with precision. Finally, there is the problem of understanding the biblical descriptions of music and its performance. Only in this century have scholars been able to interpret the information provided in the Bible in terms of Eastern music systems.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Music in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Music in the Psalms<\/p>\n<p>• Music in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MusicintheOldTestament\">Music in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The first musician mentioned in the Bible is “Jubal, the first musician—the inventor of the harp and flute” (Gn 4:21, <span>nlt<\/span>). The importance of this description of a musician so early in history lies in the equality Jubal is given with his brothers Jabal, the herdsman, and Tubal-cain, the smith. Music making is recognized among the earliest professions of nomadic peoples. The name Jubal is believed to be a derivative from the Hebrew word for “ram.” The ram’s horn <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shophar<\/span><em>)<\/em> was an early instrument of the Jewish people and was significant in signaling important events.<\/p>\n<p>For the most part, the music described in early biblical history was of a functional nature. Music gained special significance as it became an important part of temple worship. Many of the descriptions of music making in ancient Israel, before David’s time, are quite utilitarian. There are accounts of music at times of farewell (Gn 31:27), at times of rejoicing and feasting (Ex 32:17-18; Is 5:12; 24:8-9), at military victories (2 Chr 20:27-28), and for work (Nm 21:17, the song of the well diggers; Is 16:10; Jer 48:33). Most of this music was probably rather crude and primitive in nature, especially the music associated with military advances, which was meant to terrify the enemy (Jgs 7:17-20). The music and dancing that greeted Moses as he descended from the mountain was described as if it sounded like “war in the camp” (Ex 32:17-18).<\/p>\n<p>In the early history of the Jewish people, women played an important part in the performance of music. The image of women dancing and singing for joy accompanied by percussion instruments is repeated several times: Miriam led the women in a hymn of thanksgiving after the deliverance from the Red Sea (Ex 15); Jephthah’s daughter welcomed her father in his victory (Jgs 11:34); Deborah joined with Barak in singing a song of victory (Jgs 5); and women hailed David after his defeat of the Philistines (1 Sm 18:6-7). There is little mention of women as musicians following the establishment of the temple in Jerusalem, but there are a few allusions to the fact that women did participate in singing and dancing. The account of the return from exile in Babylon includes both male and female singers (Neh 7:67), confirming that women still took part in musical performance.<\/p>\n<p>As Jerusalem became the religious center of the Hebrew people (950–850 <span>BC<\/span>), the role of the professional musician became more important. The women’s songs became insignificant compared to the pomp and ceremony associated with the temple and the royal court. While the Levitical singers took most of the musical responsibility at the temple, the development of antiphonal singing allowed the people to join in on responses in the singing of psalms.<\/p>\n<h5>Musical Style and Use<\/h5>\n<p>The Jewish people seem to have been especially musical. Of course, they were influenced by other ancient cultures, but there is evidence that they were in demand as musicians by other peoples. According to an Assyrian document, King Hezekiah gave as tribute to King Sennacherib many male and female Jewish musicians. The Babylonians demanded that the captive Jews sing to them and entertain them (cf. Ps 137:3).<\/p>\n<p>Since the OT’s purpose was to narrate the relationship between the Jewish nation and God, most of the references to music deal with its function in worship. However, evidence reveals that there was also a large body of secular musical literature. There may have been guilds of poets and singers early in Jewish history. The kinds of songs recorded in the early part of the OT represent a folklike poetry. The song of thanksgiving to the Lord by Moses and the people of Israel after their escape at the Red Sea is a stirring national song. Many descriptions of the biblical writers reflect the spirit of bardic song. This would be logical, as these stories were meant to be passed on. Marching songs (2 Chr 20:27-28), and songs of triumph (Jgs 5) also indicate a secular body of music.<\/p>\n<h5>Music in Worship<\/h5>\n<p>The singers and musicians for the temple worship were chosen from the tribe of Levi. King David assembled the Levites for a census, and out of the total of 38,000 men over the age of 30, 4,000 were chosen as musicians. These 4,000 were subsequently given specific jobs. “David and the chiefs of the service also set apart for the service certain of the sons of Asaph, and of Heman, and of Jeduthun, who should prophesy with lyres, with harps, and with cymbals. . . . The number of them along with their brethren, who were trained in singing to the <span>Lord<\/span>, all who were skilful, was two hundred and eighty-eight” (1 Chr 25:1, 7, <span>rsv<\/span>). The singers were further divided into 24 groups of 12 singers, who rotated in participating in the weekday, Sabbath, and high holy day services.<\/p>\n<p>According to a later source, there were minimum and maximum numbers of singers and instrumentalists required at each service. The minimum number of singers was twelve, the maximum was unlimited. There had to be in attendance at least two harps but no more than six, at least two flutes but no more than twelve, a minimum of two trumpets with no maximum, and a minimum of nine lyres with no maximum. There was only one player with a pair of cymbals.<\/p>\n<p>A singer was admitted to the Levitical choir at the age of thirty following a five-year apprenticeship (1 Chr 23:3). Five years is a relatively short time considering the amount of material these singers had to memorize (for there was no notation) and the liturgical ritual they had to master; it is speculated that they actually were in training from childhood. The Levites lived in villages outside the city wall and may have been actively involved in the musical education of their children (Neh 12:29). The Levites performed other duties connected with the sacred service, but the singers were excused from all other duties because they were on duty day and night (1 Chr 9:33). Their skills were an important part of the temple worship, and they were able to devote their entire life to the development of their musical ability. A singer served in the choir for 20 years, from age 30 to 50, and the music was of a high quality due to strict discipline and continuous practice and performance.<\/p>\n<p>From the beginning of Jewish formal worship connected with the tabernacle, music and sound was important. In Exodus 28:34-35 the descriptions of Aaron’s robe include bells attached to the lower hem that sounded as he entered the Holy Place. The first liturgical music mentioned in the OT is found in 2 Samuel 6 in the descriptions of the transfer of the ark: David and the Israelites sang, played instruments, and danced to the glory of the Lord. This music bore little resemblance to the stately ceremony described later in Solomon’s temple. In 2 Chronicles 7:6, David is given recognition for inventing the musical instruments used in the temple. In the postexilic era Levitical singers are mentioned as the descendants of Asaph, the “singing master” appointed by David (Ezr 2:41; Neh 7:44; 11:22-23). From passages such as these, we have a definite indication that liturgical music and organization stemmed from David’s time.<\/p>\n<p>The ceremonies in the Jewish temple were organized around the sacrifice. Singing formed an integral part of the sacrificial service and was necessary to validate the sacrificial action. There were special musical settings for each sacrifice; thus the daily burnt, expiatory, and laudatory offerings and libations had individual liturgies. Particular psalms became associated with certain sacrifices as well as with certain days of the week. The psalm of the day was intoned as the high priest started to pour out the drink offering. The psalm was divided into three sections, each signaled by the blowing of the trumpets, on which signal the people would prostrate themselves. This is the only time the trumpets were used together with the other instruments in orchestral fashion on solemn occasions (2 Chr 5:12-13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MusicinthePsalms\">Music in the Psalms<\/p>\n<h5>Musical Psalm Titles<\/h5>\n<p>The collection of 150 lyric poems known as the book of Psalms contains the most information on music making in ancient Israel. The Psalter contains not only religious songs but also songs that have their roots in secular or popular songs, such as work songs, love songs, and wedding songs. The majority are songs of praise, thanksgiving, prayer, and repentance. There are also historic odes that relate great national events—for example, Psalm 30, “a song at the dedication of the temple,” and Psalm 137, which portrays the sufferings of the Jews in captivity.<\/p>\n<p>The psalms were an important part of all the services of the temple; the Psalter became the liturgical hymnal of the Israelites. Worship included an appointed psalm for each day of the week. On the first day of the week, Psalm 24 was sung in remembrance of the first day of creation, Psalm 48 was sung on the second day, Psalm 82 on the third, Psalm 94 on the fourth, Psalm 81 on the fifth, Psalm 93 on the sixth, and Psalm 92 on the Sabbath. After the sacrificial offerings, Psalm 105:1-5 was sung at the morning service and Psalm 96 at the evening service. The Hallel psalms (Pss 113–118, 120–136, 146–148) were sung during the offering of the paschal lamb at the Passover feast.<\/p>\n<p>While most of the liturgical music was performed by Levites, texts of the psalms suggest that there was also congregational participation. The forms of music found both in synagogal and ecclesiastical chant had their source in the forms of the poetic text of the psalms. The simplest is the plain psalmody sung by one person (e.g., Pss 3–5, 46). In responsorial psalmody the soloist is answered by the choir (e.g., Ps 67:1-2; the soloist sang verse 1 and the choir answered with verse 2). Antiphonal psalmody involves two groups singing alternately (e.g., Ps 103:20-22). The congregation would chant a refrain such as appears in Psalm 80: “Restore us, O God; let thy face shine, that we may be saved!” recurs throughout the psalm (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Even though the synagogue had no altar for sacrifice, psalm singing retained an important place. After the Romans destroyed the temple, the worship heritage of the Jews could have been lost if the customs, including musical customs, had not become an integral part of synagogue worship.<\/p>\n<p>The most enigmatic part of the psalms is the headings that are not part of the poetic text. The first question is whether these should even be considered as superscripts. Greek, Latin, Hebrew, and other ancient languages were written in such a way that the text ran together without any break between chapters or paragraphs. This means that the verses, and even the division of the psalms themselves, were partially determined by copyists, chiefly the Masoretes. There is some question as to which psalms the extrapoetic texts actually belong with; they may actually be subscripts instead of superscripts. Sumerian and Babylonian poetry had information such as the name of the author, the musical instrument used for accompaniment, the tune, the purpose, and such listed at the end of the poem. Hence, some of the headings may actually be endings.<\/p>\n<p>The indications at the beginning of a psalm fall into three categories. They are either musical terms giving direction for the actual performance, musical cues designating the tune to which the psalm would be sung, or comments indicating the function of the psalm. These terms have been interpreted in various ways.<\/p>\n<p>Originally, these headings may have been marginal notes for the choir leaders. Realizing that these terms were not related to the psalm text proper, early biblical scribes may not have been overly careful with their placement in the text, which may explain some of the discrepancies among the early manuscripts—why certain words are left out in some and why terms assigned to only a few psalms may originally have been indicated on more of them.<\/p>\n<p>All but 50 of the psalms contain a proper name in the heading. These names possibly indicate the author; other commentators, interpreting the preposition appearing before the names to mean “for,” think the names are a dedication. Thus the title would be “A Psalm for David,” not “A Psalm of David.” This may be the case with the names of Asaph, Heman, Ethan, and especially the sons of Korah, where it would make better sense for the psalm to be written for rather than by the family. Seventy-three psalms have David’s name in the heading, hence the common reference to the Psalter as the Psalms of David. Twelve include the name of Asaph, eleven the children of Korah, two Solomon, and one each contains Moses, Heman, and Ethan.<\/p>\n<h5>Musical Terms in the Psalm Titles<\/h5>\n<p>Numerous musical terms are included in the superscriptions to cue the kind of instrumental accompaniment, mood, and style of performance for the psalm.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Alamoth<\/span> is one of the most controversial terms found in the psalm headings. It appears at the beginning of Psalm 46 and also in 1 Chronicles 15:20. One meaning for the Hebrew word is “maiden,” and musicologists interpret this as an instruction that the psalm should be sung in the range of the female singing voice. The reference in Chronicles is to harps in the range of women’s voices. This interpretation does not seem to fit Psalm 46, but if we look at the preceding psalm and read the term as a subscript, it becomes logical. Psalm 45 is a song of love, actually a nuptial ode; it would be natural for women to sing the second half (vv 10-17). While there is little mention of women singing in the temple, there is speculation that young boys in training may have sung along with the Levitical singers. Also this may be a case where the term appears only once in the modern text but may have been used more often in the original. Another possible meaning for <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Alamoth<\/span> is “flutes,” perhaps describing the kind of musical accompaniment for the performance of the psalm.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Gittith<\/span> is a term found in the superscriptions of Psalms 8, 81, and 84. It may be a musical cue, indicating a mood for the performance of these psalms, but a more common explanation is that it is a collective term for the stringed instruments that would have accompanied them.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Mahalath<\/span> has been left in its original Hebrew form by early translators and is found in the headings of Psalms 53 and 88. It may have roots in the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mahaleh<\/span> “sickness” or <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mahot<\/span> “dance,” though neither of these words can be related to the psalm texts. Another explanation is a musical one. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Mahalath<\/span> may come from the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">halal<\/span> meaning “to pierce,” implying that the psalm was to be accompanied with pipes.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Maskil<\/span> (<span>kjv<\/span> “Maschil”) appears in the headings of 13 psalms (Pss 32, 42, 44–45, 52–55, 74, 78, 88–89, 142). The term is probably derived from the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sakal<\/span><em>,<\/em> “to have insight or comprehension,” but there is no agreement among commentators. By looking at the psalms themselves, their didactic nature and the structure of stanzas and refrains, musicologists conclude the term represents a song of praise, possibly sung by a soloist with participation by the choir.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Menazzeah<\/span> appears in the heading of 55 psalms. It appears 52 times in the first three books of Psalms (Pss 1–89), not at all in book four (Pss 90–106), and 3 times in book five (Pss 107–150). The most common modern translations are “to the Choirmaster” (<span>rsv<\/span>), “to the choir director” (<span>nasb<\/span>, <span>nlt<\/span>), “to the director of music” (<span>niv<\/span>), “to the chief Musician” (<span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The word is derived from the Hebrew verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nazzah<\/span><em>,<\/em> appearing in 1 Chronicles 23:4 and Ezra 3:8-9 in the sense of “administering.” In 1 Chronicles 15:21 the word is found in relation to leading or directing song in the temple. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Menazzeah<\/span> relates to the choirmaster and represents the singer chosen to lead the music who probably was involved in rehearsing and instructing. It is now assumed that <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">menazzeah<\/span> indicates the psalm was to be sung partially or entirely by a soloist. This is evidenced by the change in some texts from “I” where the soloist sang, to “we” where the choir or congregation sang. Psalm 5 is an example of a text divided for solo and choral singing: verses 1-3 solo; verses 4-6 choral; verses 7-8 solo; verses 9-10 choral; and verses 11-12 end the psalm with the combined soloist and choir.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Miktam<\/span> (<span>kjv<\/span> “Michtam”) is another term that has no clear musical meaning, due mainly to the fact that its etymology is unknown. It occurs in Psalms 16 and 56–60, all of which have a character of lamentation or supplication. In a musical sense, it probably meant that a certain well-known tune was to be selected as the melody of the psalm.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Mizmor<\/span> (Hebrew, meaning a song sung to instrumental accompaniment) is found nowhere else in the Bible; it is included in the superscriptions of 57 psalms. It probably indicated a song accompanied by melodic instruments as opposed to a dance song accompanied by rhythmic instruments.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Neginah<\/span> appears in the superscriptions of Psalms 4, 6, 54–55, 61, 67, and 76. The term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">neginah<\/span> and its plural <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">neginoth<\/span> are found in Psalm 77:7, Lamentations 5:14, Isaiah 38:20, and Habakkuk 3:19. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Neginah<\/span><em>,<\/em> from the Hebrew root <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">naggen<\/span><em>,<\/em> “to touch the strings,” instructs that stringed instruments accompany the singing.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Nehiloth<\/span> is found only in the introduction to Psalm 5 (<span>kjv<\/span>). The origin of the word is problematic. It could come from the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nahal<\/span><em>,<\/em> “to possess or inherit,” or more feasibly from <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">halal<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to pierce.” The latter implies the idea of a pierced instrument (the flute or pipe) to be used for accompaniment.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Sheminith<\/span> appears in Psalms 6 and 12 and also in 1 Chronicles 15:21. The Hebrew word means literally “over the eighth.” Some scholars feel it had something to do with an octave, but the Hebrew musical language probably did not include a musical unit divided into eight parts. Other scholars interpret <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sheminith<\/span> as meaning an eight-stringed instrument. A more logical interpretation comes from examining its use in 1 Chronicles. In 15:20 the instructions are for musicians to play the harps according to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">alamoth<\/span> and in verse 21 to play the lyres according to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sheminith<\/span><em>.<\/em> Here the terms <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">alamoth<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sheminith<\/span> seem to be used in opposition. If <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">alamoth<\/span> implies a register of the female voice, then <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sheminith<\/span> would imply a lower register. Thus, it may have been an instruction to use a lower pitched instrument for accompaniment.<\/p>\n<h5>Psalm Varieties in the Titles<\/h5>\n<p>Some of the notes in the psalm headings are indications of the type or variety of psalm.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Hazkir<\/span> is found in the headings of Psalms 38 and 70. According to the Targum, this is an indication that the psalm was sung at the sacrificial rite called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">askara<\/span> and is translated “for a memorial offering.”<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Lammed<\/span> appears in the superscription of Psalm 60 in the phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">le-lammed<\/span><em>,<\/em> translated “to teach.” According to tradition, this was a psalm, though undoubtedly not the only one, taught to young people as part of their education. This is another example of a term that may have been omitted from other psalms in later versions of the Psalter.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shiggaion<\/span> is in the heading of Psalm 7 and also in Habakkuk 3:1. The word probably comes from the Hebrew verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shagah<\/span><em>,<\/em> “to wander,” but may also be connected with the Assyrian liturgical term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shigu<\/span><em>,<\/em> which represented a plaintive song in several stanzas. Biblical scholars have assumed <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shiggaion<\/span><em>,<\/em> plural <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shigionoth<\/span><em>,<\/em> was a lament or penitential song.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shir<\/span> is the simplest word for “song” and was probably used in the headings at an early stage of the Psalter; it is usually found with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mizmor<\/span> (13 times). Fifteen psalms have this heading. It was probably the term for a specific type of praise song, usually performed by the choir.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shir Hamaalot<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shir Lamaalot<\/span> occur in the headings of Psalms 120–134, which are often referred to as the Psalms of Ascent (<span>kjv<\/span> “Psalms of Degrees”). Most explanations offered relate to the fact that the temple was situated on high ground. Often these 15 psalms are associated with the 15 steps leading from the Court of the Women to the Court of the Israelites. But most contemporary scholars believe the idea of “going up” referred to the pilgrims’ journey to Jerusalem to worship at the temple. These psalms are short, with popular appeal, making them appropriate for singing during the journey.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shir Hanukkat Habayit<\/span> is found only in the heading of Psalm 30. This phrase tells that the psalm was to be used for the dedication or rededication of the house of God.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shir-yedidot<\/span> appears only in Psalm 45. It refers to a love song that was probably sung at wedding ceremonies.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Tefillah<\/span> is a common term for “prayer” and appears in the headings of Psalms 17, 86, 90, 102, and 142, and also in Habakkuk 3:1. The word probably refers to a specific form of poetic prayer.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Selah<\/span> is one of the most frequently used, but most enigmatic, terms found in the book of Psalms. It occurs in 39 psalms, appearing a total of 71 times in the Psalter—67 times within the text and 4 times at the end of a psalm. It is most frequent in the first three books. In the first book <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">selah<\/span> appears in 9 psalms; in the second book, 17 psalms; in the third book, 11 psalms. In the fourth book it is not found at all and in the fifth book in only two psalms. Thirty-one of these psalms also include the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">menazzeah<\/span> in their superscriptions, which implies that they were sung by a soloist and choir. Most commonly, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">selah<\/span> is interpreted as a signal for a break in the singing and possibly for an instrumental interlude. It never appears at the beginning of a psalm but only in the middle of the text or at the end. The regularity of its appearance within a psalm is not consistent, and in only a few instances do these divisions break the psalm into equal sections. Because of the random placement of the term, some scholars believe that, like the headings, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">selah<\/span> was not always carefully copied into the text. It may have been a note appearing only in the texts of the musicians, which would explain this inconsistency. An explanation of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">selah<\/span> is found in the Talmudic tradition: “Ben Azra clashed the cymbal and the Levites broke forth into singing. When they reached a break in the singing they blew upon the trumpets and the people prostrated themselves; at every break there was a blowing of the trumpet and at every blowing of the trumpet a prostration. This was the rite of the daily whole offering in the service of the House of our God.” <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Selah<\/span><em>,<\/em> then, would be an instruction for the musicians that the singing was to cease and the instrumentalists were to play.<\/p>\n<p>The term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">higgaion selah<\/span> appears once, in Psalm 9:16. The word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">higgaiaon<\/span> comes from the root <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hagah<\/span><em>,<\/em> “to murmur, to growl, to produce a low sound.” This may have been an instruction for the interlude to be more subdued than a normal <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">selah<\/span><em>.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>Ancient Melodies in the Titles<\/h5>\n<p>Many psalms contain headings that are not direct musical references but are cue words to suggest well-known tunes. They probably refer either to names or the first words of popular secular songs <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">makams<\/span><em>)<\/em> whose melodic patterns were used in singing the psalm. Many biblical scholars have tried to find hidden meaning in these headings, but most musicologists believe these are simply references or introductions to melodies.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Aijeleth Shahar<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalm 22 (<span>kjv<\/span>), is translated “according to The Hind of the Dawn” (<span>rsv<\/span>), and “To the tune of ‘The Doe of the Morning’ ” (<span>niv<\/span>), “To the tune ‘Doe of the Dawn’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Al-taschith<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalms 57–59 and 75 (<span>kjv<\/span>), is translated “To the tune ‘Do Not Destroy!’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Jonath-elem-rechokim<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalm 56 (<span>kjv<\/span>), is translated “according to The Dove on Far-off Terebinths” (<span>rsv<\/span>), and “To the tune ‘Dove on Distant Oaks’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Mahalath Leannoth<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalm 88, is translated “To the tune ‘The Suffering of Affliction’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Muthlabben<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalm 9, is translated “To the tune ‘Death of the Son’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shoshannim<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalms 45 and 69 (<span>kjv<\/span>), is translated “To the tune ‘Lilies’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shoshannim-Eduth<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalm 80 (<span>kjv<\/span>), is translated “To the tune ‘Lilies of the Covenant’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shushan-eduth<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalm 60, is translated “To the tune ‘Lily of the Testimony’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>These melody types appear only in the first three books of the Psalter, and this may imply that these popular <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">makams<\/span> had fallen into disuse by the time the final books of the Psalter were written. Other <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">makam<\/span>-types had probably become popular, and the authors, realizing the relatively short life of a popular tune, did not include them in the headings of the Psalms but left the choice up to the performer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MusicintheNewTestament\">Music in the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>First-Century Influences<\/h5>\n<h6>The Synagogue<\/h6>\n<p>By the time of Christ, the synagogue had become the chief place of worship for the Jewish people. It began as a place for study of the law but gradually became the center of worship for Jews unable to attend the temple. The liturgical service of the temple could not be duplicated in the synagogue as there was no sacrificial rite, and the music could not be exactly reproduced as there were no trained Levitical singers. Scholars do not agree about the amount of continuity between the music of the temple and the music of the synagogue, but there is evidence that certain musical practices did remain constant between the two places of worship.<\/p>\n<p>Information on the customs and rituals of the synagogue come from Talmudic writings. The musical elements of worship in the synagogue were the chanting of Scripture, psalmody, and spiritual songs. The choral singing of the temple was replaced by a single cantor. The cantor was a layman who, according to tradition, had to have the following qualifications: “He had to be well educated, gifted with a sweet voice, of humble personality, recognized by the community, conversant with Scripture and all the prayers; he must not be a rich man, for his prayers should come from his heart.” His most important job was the cantillation of the Law and the Prophets. A series of accents and punctuations, forerunners of actual musical notation, were indications for the cantor in the musical interpretation of the Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Psalm singing was gradually transplanted from the temple to the synagogue, which in turn influenced the early Christian church. Gregorian psalm tones have their roots in Hebrew psalmody.<\/p>\n<h6>Greek and Roman Cultures<\/h6>\n<p>While both the temple and the synagogue were familiar to the early Christians (Acts 2:46-47; 3:1; 5:42; 9:20; 18:4; etc.), the Greek and Roman cultures also played a major part in shaping the young church. Hellenistic influences by the time of Christ had long been felt in the Middle East, and while it was strongly opposed by some Jewish leaders, the Greek arts had permeated Jewish culture. Greek philosophers considered music a cathartic force that could lead humans into metaphysical knowledge. This understanding led to the belief that music had a moral substance that could influence people to either good or evil. If this philosophy had totally encompassed Judeo-Christian thought, certainly Paul would have encouraged the use of music in the spread of the gospel. However, Paul’s omission of this theory implies that the Judeo-Christian world at that time had rejected the Greek ideal, at least in part.<\/p>\n<p>While the Jewish rabbis considered music an art form for the praise of God, and while the Greek philosophers thought of it as a powerful moral force in creation, the Romans considered music mainly as entertainment. The music of the Roman games was neither religious nor philosophic and, from the accounts of witnesses, it was not technically exceptional. In the Roman Empire musicians were given a lower status and looked on as mere entertainers. One reason the early church did not include instrumental music in their worship was in reaction to the debased secular use of instruments by the Romans.<\/p>\n<h5>In the New Testament Writings<\/h5>\n<p>One of the few mentions of instruments in the NT is the use of flutes at a wake (Mt 9:23). As in the OT, music is associated with feasting and merrymaking (e.g., the return of the prodigal son, Lk 15:25). Five passages mention music metaphorically (Mt 6:2; 11:17; Lk 7:32; 1 Cor 13:1; 14:7-8). The most well known of these is Paul’s celebration of love in 1 Corinthians 13. The denunciation of the gong and cymbals must be understood in light of the attitude of the early Christians toward the music of the Pharisees. Here the signal instruments of the temple were used to represent pompous display of religious pietism.<\/p>\n\n<p>Most references to music are found in the eschatological visions and prophetic passages scattered throughout the NT—most frequently in the book of Revelation (also Mt 24:31; 1 Cor 15:52; 1 Thes 4:16; Heb 12:19). Many of these descriptions have a direct association with musical references in the OT (e.g., the use of harps and trumpets and the singing of the Hallelujah). But the value of many of the passages in Revelation comes from their literary style. These doxological and psalmlike passages were probably spontaneous “spiritual songs” composed by the young church (e.g., Rv 5:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>The passages that mention religious or liturgical music are often more conceptual than literal. Two parallel passages describing the Last Supper (Mt 26:30; Mk 14:26) mention that Christ and his disciples sang a hymn. This is the only direct account of Jesus singing, but it is probable that when he read in the synagogue he did so in the accepted vocal style (Lk 4:16-20). There is much controversy surrounding the actual events at the Last Supper, but we can assume that the hymn sung was a traditional Jewish hymn, probably associated with the Passover.<\/p>\n<p>From the account in Acts 16:25 we know that Paul and Silas sang hymns while in jail. Paul gives instruction for music making in 1 Corinthians 14:15, 26 in terms of a balance between rationalism and emotion. And, as with all the gifts of the Spirit, Paul asks that singing be done for edification.<\/p>\n<p>In two similar passages (Eph 5:19; Col 3:16) Paul groups together three musical terms—psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs. The singing of psalms was an obvious carryover from the synagogue, and we can assume that the early Christian psalm singing followed the Jewish style. The term for “hymns” probably refers to poetic texts, possibly modeled after the psalms, but in praise of Christ. “Spiritual songs” may refer to a spontaneous, ecstatic form of musical prayer, possibly wordless (perhaps related to glossolalia), in a style that was popular in mystical Judaism. These outbursts of song were probably melismatic (sung on one tone) and are perhaps the forerunners of the later Alleluia chant.<\/p>\n<h5>Hymnody in the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>It can be assumed that the early Christians composed hymns in praise of Christ. Logically, most of the hymns found in the NT are based on Hebrew poetic psalm forms, but there is Greek and Latin influence also. The hymns from the Gospel of Luke have become well-known canticles adopted by the church: the Magnificat (Lk 1:46-55), the Benedictus (1:68-79), the Gloria (2:14) and the Nunc Dimittis (2:29-32). While patterned after the psalms of the OT, these hymns are full of confidence in the salvation of Christ and in his imminent return. Other Christological hymns found in the NT include the prologue to the Gospel of John, Ephesians 2:14-16, Philippians 2:6-11, Colossians 1:15-20, 1 Timothy 3:16, Hebrews 1:3, and 1 Peter 3:18-22.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MUSIC<\/h3>\n<p>A natural human expression that probably began with speech-singing and developed into songs, which were then accompanied by instruments. Music as we know it has become quite complex, a luxury and entertainment; music in antiquity, however, was a functional expression of daily life, work, and worship.<\/p>\n<p>The phrase “sing to the Lord,” common to the OT (Ex 15:21; 1 Chr 16:9; Pss 68:32; 96:1-2; Is 42:10; Jer 20:13), was not unique to the Jewish nation. All religions draw on the natural human impulse to sing. The injunction “sing to the Lord” was a signal for the people to pour out their praise in song.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible, however, is limited in its treatment of music in ancient Israel. Since there was no written musical notation, the primary record of songs sung by the Hebrews is the collection of texts, particularly the psalms, and a few enigmatic musical instructions. The biblical writers were writing a history not of their culture but of their relationship with God; hence, their comments about music are not critical. Also, the biblical documents cover a long span of history and are grouped according to category rather than in chronological order, thus making it difficult to order the development of musical style with precision. Finally, there is the problem of understanding the biblical descriptions of music and its performance. Only in this century have scholars been able to interpret the information provided in the Bible in terms of Eastern music systems.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Music in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Music in the Psalms<\/p>\n<p>• Music in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MusicintheOldTestament\">Music in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The first musician mentioned in the Bible is “Jubal, the first musician—the inventor of the harp and flute” (Gn 4:21, <span>nlt<\/span>). The importance of this description of a musician so early in history lies in the equality Jubal is given with his brothers Jabal, the herdsman, and Tubal-cain, the smith. Music making is recognized among the earliest professions of nomadic peoples. The name Jubal is believed to be a derivative from the Hebrew word for “ram.” The ram’s horn <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shophar<\/span><em>)<\/em> was an early instrument of the Jewish people and was significant in signaling important events.<\/p>\n<p>For the most part, the music described in early biblical history was of a functional nature. Music gained special significance as it became an important part of temple worship. Many of the descriptions of music making in ancient Israel, before David’s time, are quite utilitarian. There are accounts of music at times of farewell (Gn 31:27), at times of rejoicing and feasting (Ex 32:17-18; Is 5:12; 24:8-9), at military victories (2 Chr 20:27-28), and for work (Nm 21:17, the song of the well diggers; Is 16:10; Jer 48:33). Most of this music was probably rather crude and primitive in nature, especially the music associated with military advances, which was meant to terrify the enemy (Jgs 7:17-20). The music and dancing that greeted Moses as he descended from the mountain was described as if it sounded like “war in the camp” (Ex 32:17-18).<\/p>\n<p>In the early history of the Jewish people, women played an important part in the performance of music. The image of women dancing and singing for joy accompanied by percussion instruments is repeated several times: Miriam led the women in a hymn of thanksgiving after the deliverance from the Red Sea (Ex 15); Jephthah’s daughter welcomed her father in his victory (Jgs 11:34); Deborah joined with Barak in singing a song of victory (Jgs 5); and women hailed David after his defeat of the Philistines (1 Sm 18:6-7). There is little mention of women as musicians following the establishment of the temple in Jerusalem, but there are a few allusions to the fact that women did participate in singing and dancing. The account of the return from exile in Babylon includes both male and female singers (Neh 7:67), confirming that women still took part in musical performance.<\/p>\n<p>As Jerusalem became the religious center of the Hebrew people (950–850 <span>BC<\/span>), the role of the professional musician became more important. The women’s songs became insignificant compared to the pomp and ceremony associated with the temple and the royal court. While the Levitical singers took most of the musical responsibility at the temple, the development of antiphonal singing allowed the people to join in on responses in the singing of psalms.<\/p>\n<h5>Musical Style and Use<\/h5>\n<p>The Jewish people seem to have been especially musical. Of course, they were influenced by other ancient cultures, but there is evidence that they were in demand as musicians by other peoples. According to an Assyrian document, King Hezekiah gave as tribute to King Sennacherib many male and female Jewish musicians. The Babylonians demanded that the captive Jews sing to them and entertain them (cf. Ps 137:3).<\/p>\n<p>Since the OT’s purpose was to narrate the relationship between the Jewish nation and God, most of the references to music deal with its function in worship. However, evidence reveals that there was also a large body of secular musical literature. There may have been guilds of poets and singers early in Jewish history. The kinds of songs recorded in the early part of the OT represent a folklike poetry. The song of thanksgiving to the Lord by Moses and the people of Israel after their escape at the Red Sea is a stirring national song. Many descriptions of the biblical writers reflect the spirit of bardic song. This would be logical, as these stories were meant to be passed on. Marching songs (2 Chr 20:27-28), and songs of triumph (Jgs 5) also indicate a secular body of music.<\/p>\n<h5>Music in Worship<\/h5>\n<p>The singers and musicians for the temple worship were chosen from the tribe of Levi. King David assembled the Levites for a census, and out of the total of 38,000 men over the age of 30, 4,000 were chosen as musicians. These 4,000 were subsequently given specific jobs. “David and the chiefs of the service also set apart for the service certain of the sons of Asaph, and of Heman, and of Jeduthun, who should prophesy with lyres, with harps, and with cymbals. . . . The number of them along with their brethren, who were trained in singing to the <span>Lord<\/span>, all who were skilful, was two hundred and eighty-eight” (1 Chr 25:1, 7, <span>rsv<\/span>). The singers were further divided into 24 groups of 12 singers, who rotated in participating in the weekday, Sabbath, and high holy day services.<\/p>\n<p>According to a later source, there were minimum and maximum numbers of singers and instrumentalists required at each service. The minimum number of singers was twelve, the maximum was unlimited. There had to be in attendance at least two harps but no more than six, at least two flutes but no more than twelve, a minimum of two trumpets with no maximum, and a minimum of nine lyres with no maximum. There was only one player with a pair of cymbals.<\/p>\n<p>A singer was admitted to the Levitical choir at the age of thirty following a five-year apprenticeship (1 Chr 23:3). Five years is a relatively short time considering the amount of material these singers had to memorize (for there was no notation) and the liturgical ritual they had to master; it is speculated that they actually were in training from childhood. The Levites lived in villages outside the city wall and may have been actively involved in the musical education of their children (Neh 12:29). The Levites performed other duties connected with the sacred service, but the singers were excused from all other duties because they were on duty day and night (1 Chr 9:33). Their skills were an important part of the temple worship, and they were able to devote their entire life to the development of their musical ability. A singer served in the choir for 20 years, from age 30 to 50, and the music was of a high quality due to strict discipline and continuous practice and performance.<\/p>\n<p>From the beginning of Jewish formal worship connected with the tabernacle, music and sound was important. In Exodus 28:34-35 the descriptions of Aaron’s robe include bells attached to the lower hem that sounded as he entered the Holy Place. The first liturgical music mentioned in the OT is found in 2 Samuel 6 in the descriptions of the transfer of the ark: David and the Israelites sang, played instruments, and danced to the glory of the Lord. This music bore little resemblance to the stately ceremony described later in Solomon’s temple. In 2 Chronicles 7:6, David is given recognition for inventing the musical instruments used in the temple. In the postexilic era Levitical singers are mentioned as the descendants of Asaph, the “singing master” appointed by David (Ezr 2:41; Neh 7:44; 11:22-23). From passages such as these, we have a definite indication that liturgical music and organization stemmed from David’s time.<\/p>\n<p>The ceremonies in the Jewish temple were organized around the sacrifice. Singing formed an integral part of the sacrificial service and was necessary to validate the sacrificial action. There were special musical settings for each sacrifice; thus the daily burnt, expiatory, and laudatory offerings and libations had individual liturgies. Particular psalms became associated with certain sacrifices as well as with certain days of the week. The psalm of the day was intoned as the high priest started to pour out the drink offering. The psalm was divided into three sections, each signaled by the blowing of the trumpets, on which signal the people would prostrate themselves. This is the only time the trumpets were used together with the other instruments in orchestral fashion on solemn occasions (2 Chr 5:12-13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MusicinthePsalms\">Music in the Psalms<\/p>\n<h5>Musical Psalm Titles<\/h5>\n<p>The collection of 150 lyric poems known as the book of Psalms contains the most information on music making in ancient Israel. The Psalter contains not only religious songs but also songs that have their roots in secular or popular songs, such as work songs, love songs, and wedding songs. The majority are songs of praise, thanksgiving, prayer, and repentance. There are also historic odes that relate great national events—for example, Psalm 30, “a song at the dedication of the temple,” and Psalm 137, which portrays the sufferings of the Jews in captivity.<\/p>\n<p>The psalms were an important part of all the services of the temple; the Psalter became the liturgical hymnal of the Israelites. Worship included an appointed psalm for each day of the week. On the first day of the week, Psalm 24 was sung in remembrance of the first day of creation, Psalm 48 was sung on the second day, Psalm 82 on the third, Psalm 94 on the fourth, Psalm 81 on the fifth, Psalm 93 on the sixth, and Psalm 92 on the Sabbath. After the sacrificial offerings, Psalm 105:1-5 was sung at the morning service and Psalm 96 at the evening service. The Hallel psalms (Pss 113–118, 120–136, 146–148) were sung during the offering of the paschal lamb at the Passover feast.<\/p>\n<p>While most of the liturgical music was performed by Levites, texts of the psalms suggest that there was also congregational participation. The forms of music found both in synagogal and ecclesiastical chant had their source in the forms of the poetic text of the psalms. The simplest is the plain psalmody sung by one person (e.g., Pss 3–5, 46). In responsorial psalmody the soloist is answered by the choir (e.g., Ps 67:1-2; the soloist sang verse 1 and the choir answered with verse 2). Antiphonal psalmody involves two groups singing alternately (e.g., Ps 103:20-22). The congregation would chant a refrain such as appears in Psalm 80: “Restore us, O God; let thy face shine, that we may be saved!” recurs throughout the psalm (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Even though the synagogue had no altar for sacrifice, psalm singing retained an important place. After the Romans destroyed the temple, the worship heritage of the Jews could have been lost if the customs, including musical customs, had not become an integral part of synagogue worship.<\/p>\n<p>The most enigmatic part of the psalms is the headings that are not part of the poetic text. The first question is whether these should even be considered as superscripts. Greek, Latin, Hebrew, and other ancient languages were written in such a way that the text ran together without any break between chapters or paragraphs. This means that the verses, and even the division of the psalms themselves, were partially determined by copyists, chiefly the Masoretes. There is some question as to which psalms the extrapoetic texts actually belong with; they may actually be subscripts instead of superscripts. Sumerian and Babylonian poetry had information such as the name of the author, the musical instrument used for accompaniment, the tune, the purpose, and such listed at the end of the poem. Hence, some of the headings may actually be endings.<\/p>\n<p>The indications at the beginning of a psalm fall into three categories. They are either musical terms giving direction for the actual performance, musical cues designating the tune to which the psalm would be sung, or comments indicating the function of the psalm. These terms have been interpreted in various ways.<\/p>\n<p>Originally, these headings may have been marginal notes for the choir leaders. Realizing that these terms were not related to the psalm text proper, early biblical scribes may not have been overly careful with their placement in the text, which may explain some of the discrepancies among the early manuscripts—why certain words are left out in some and why terms assigned to only a few psalms may originally have been indicated on more of them.<\/p>\n<p>All but 50 of the psalms contain a proper name in the heading. These names possibly indicate the author; other commentators, interpreting the preposition appearing before the names to mean “for,” think the names are a dedication. Thus the title would be “A Psalm for David,” not “A Psalm of David.” This may be the case with the names of Asaph, Heman, Ethan, and especially the sons of Korah, where it would make better sense for the psalm to be written for rather than by the family. Seventy-three psalms have David’s name in the heading, hence the common reference to the Psalter as the Psalms of David. Twelve include the name of Asaph, eleven the children of Korah, two Solomon, and one each contains Moses, Heman, and Ethan.<\/p>\n<h5>Musical Terms in the Psalm Titles<\/h5>\n<p>Numerous musical terms are included in the superscriptions to cue the kind of instrumental accompaniment, mood, and style of performance for the psalm.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Alamoth<\/span> is one of the most controversial terms found in the psalm headings. It appears at the beginning of Psalm 46 and also in 1 Chronicles 15:20. One meaning for the Hebrew word is “maiden,” and musicologists interpret this as an instruction that the psalm should be sung in the range of the female singing voice. The reference in Chronicles is to harps in the range of women’s voices. This interpretation does not seem to fit Psalm 46, but if we look at the preceding psalm and read the term as a subscript, it becomes logical. Psalm 45 is a song of love, actually a nuptial ode; it would be natural for women to sing the second half (vv 10-17). While there is little mention of women singing in the temple, there is speculation that young boys in training may have sung along with the Levitical singers. Also this may be a case where the term appears only once in the modern text but may have been used more often in the original. Another possible meaning for <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Alamoth<\/span> is “flutes,” perhaps describing the kind of musical accompaniment for the performance of the psalm.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Gittith<\/span> is a term found in the superscriptions of Psalms 8, 81, and 84. It may be a musical cue, indicating a mood for the performance of these psalms, but a more common explanation is that it is a collective term for the stringed instruments that would have accompanied them.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Mahalath<\/span> has been left in its original Hebrew form by early translators and is found in the headings of Psalms 53 and 88. It may have roots in the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mahaleh<\/span> “sickness” or <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mahot<\/span> “dance,” though neither of these words can be related to the psalm texts. Another explanation is a musical one. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Mahalath<\/span> may come from the word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">halal<\/span> meaning “to pierce,” implying that the psalm was to be accompanied with pipes.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Maskil<\/span> (<span>kjv<\/span> “Maschil”) appears in the headings of 13 psalms (Pss 32, 42, 44–45, 52–55, 74, 78, 88–89, 142). The term is probably derived from the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sakal<\/span><em>,<\/em> “to have insight or comprehension,” but there is no agreement among commentators. By looking at the psalms themselves, their didactic nature and the structure of stanzas and refrains, musicologists conclude the term represents a song of praise, possibly sung by a soloist with participation by the choir.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Menazzeah<\/span> appears in the heading of 55 psalms. It appears 52 times in the first three books of Psalms (Pss 1–89), not at all in book four (Pss 90–106), and 3 times in book five (Pss 107–150). The most common modern translations are “to the Choirmaster” (<span>rsv<\/span>), “to the choir director” (<span>nasb<\/span>, <span>nlt<\/span>), “to the director of music” (<span>niv<\/span>), “to the chief Musician” (<span>kjv<\/span>, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The word is derived from the Hebrew verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nazzah<\/span><em>,<\/em> appearing in 1 Chronicles 23:4 and Ezra 3:8-9 in the sense of “administering.” In 1 Chronicles 15:21 the word is found in relation to leading or directing song in the temple. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Menazzeah<\/span> relates to the choirmaster and represents the singer chosen to lead the music who probably was involved in rehearsing and instructing. It is now assumed that <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">menazzeah<\/span> indicates the psalm was to be sung partially or entirely by a soloist. This is evidenced by the change in some texts from “I” where the soloist sang, to “we” where the choir or congregation sang. Psalm 5 is an example of a text divided for solo and choral singing: verses 1-3 solo; verses 4-6 choral; verses 7-8 solo; verses 9-10 choral; and verses 11-12 end the psalm with the combined soloist and choir.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Miktam<\/span> (<span>kjv<\/span> “Michtam”) is another term that has no clear musical meaning, due mainly to the fact that its etymology is unknown. It occurs in Psalms 16 and 56–60, all of which have a character of lamentation or supplication. In a musical sense, it probably meant that a certain well-known tune was to be selected as the melody of the psalm.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Mizmor<\/span> (Hebrew, meaning a song sung to instrumental accompaniment) is found nowhere else in the Bible; it is included in the superscriptions of 57 psalms. It probably indicated a song accompanied by melodic instruments as opposed to a dance song accompanied by rhythmic instruments.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Neginah<\/span> appears in the superscriptions of Psalms 4, 6, 54–55, 61, 67, and 76. The term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">neginah<\/span> and its plural <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">neginoth<\/span> are found in Psalm 77:7, Lamentations 5:14, Isaiah 38:20, and Habakkuk 3:19. <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Neginah<\/span><em>,<\/em> from the Hebrew root <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">naggen<\/span><em>,<\/em> “to touch the strings,” instructs that stringed instruments accompany the singing.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Nehiloth<\/span> is found only in the introduction to Psalm 5 (<span>kjv<\/span>). The origin of the word is problematic. It could come from the verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nahal<\/span><em>,<\/em> “to possess or inherit,” or more feasibly from <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">halal<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to pierce.” The latter implies the idea of a pierced instrument (the flute or pipe) to be used for accompaniment.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Sheminith<\/span> appears in Psalms 6 and 12 and also in 1 Chronicles 15:21. The Hebrew word means literally “over the eighth.” Some scholars feel it had something to do with an octave, but the Hebrew musical language probably did not include a musical unit divided into eight parts. Other scholars interpret <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sheminith<\/span> as meaning an eight-stringed instrument. A more logical interpretation comes from examining its use in 1 Chronicles. In 15:20 the instructions are for musicians to play the harps according to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">alamoth<\/span> and in verse 21 to play the lyres according to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sheminith<\/span><em>.<\/em> Here the terms <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">alamoth<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sheminith<\/span> seem to be used in opposition. If <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">alamoth<\/span> implies a register of the female voice, then <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sheminith<\/span> would imply a lower register. Thus, it may have been an instruction to use a lower pitched instrument for accompaniment.<\/p>\n<h5>Psalm Varieties in the Titles<\/h5>\n<p>Some of the notes in the psalm headings are indications of the type or variety of psalm.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Hazkir<\/span> is found in the headings of Psalms 38 and 70. According to the Targum, this is an indication that the psalm was sung at the sacrificial rite called <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">askara<\/span> and is translated “for a memorial offering.”<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Lammed<\/span> appears in the superscription of Psalm 60 in the phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">le-lammed<\/span><em>,<\/em> translated “to teach.” According to tradition, this was a psalm, though undoubtedly not the only one, taught to young people as part of their education. This is another example of a term that may have been omitted from other psalms in later versions of the Psalter.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shiggaion<\/span> is in the heading of Psalm 7 and also in Habakkuk 3:1. The word probably comes from the Hebrew verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shagah<\/span><em>,<\/em> “to wander,” but may also be connected with the Assyrian liturgical term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shigu<\/span><em>,<\/em> which represented a plaintive song in several stanzas. Biblical scholars have assumed <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shiggaion<\/span><em>,<\/em> plural <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shigionoth<\/span><em>,<\/em> was a lament or penitential song.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shir<\/span> is the simplest word for “song” and was probably used in the headings at an early stage of the Psalter; it is usually found with <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mizmor<\/span> (13 times). Fifteen psalms have this heading. It was probably the term for a specific type of praise song, usually performed by the choir.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shir Hamaalot<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shir Lamaalot<\/span> occur in the headings of Psalms 120–134, which are often referred to as the Psalms of Ascent (<span>kjv<\/span> “Psalms of Degrees”). Most explanations offered relate to the fact that the temple was situated on high ground. Often these 15 psalms are associated with the 15 steps leading from the Court of the Women to the Court of the Israelites. But most contemporary scholars believe the idea of “going up” referred to the pilgrims’ journey to Jerusalem to worship at the temple. These psalms are short, with popular appeal, making them appropriate for singing during the journey.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shir Hanukkat Habayit<\/span> is found only in the heading of Psalm 30. This phrase tells that the psalm was to be used for the dedication or rededication of the house of God.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shir-yedidot<\/span> appears only in Psalm 45. It refers to a love song that was probably sung at wedding ceremonies.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Tefillah<\/span> is a common term for “prayer” and appears in the headings of Psalms 17, 86, 90, 102, and 142, and also in Habakkuk 3:1. The word probably refers to a specific form of poetic prayer.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Selah<\/span> is one of the most frequently used, but most enigmatic, terms found in the book of Psalms. It occurs in 39 psalms, appearing a total of 71 times in the Psalter—67 times within the text and 4 times at the end of a psalm. It is most frequent in the first three books. In the first book <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">selah<\/span> appears in 9 psalms; in the second book, 17 psalms; in the third book, 11 psalms. In the fourth book it is not found at all and in the fifth book in only two psalms. Thirty-one of these psalms also include the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">menazzeah<\/span> in their superscriptions, which implies that they were sung by a soloist and choir. Most commonly, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">selah<\/span> is interpreted as a signal for a break in the singing and possibly for an instrumental interlude. It never appears at the beginning of a psalm but only in the middle of the text or at the end. The regularity of its appearance within a psalm is not consistent, and in only a few instances do these divisions break the psalm into equal sections. Because of the random placement of the term, some scholars believe that, like the headings, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">selah<\/span> was not always carefully copied into the text. It may have been a note appearing only in the texts of the musicians, which would explain this inconsistency. An explanation of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">selah<\/span> is found in the Talmudic tradition: “Ben Azra clashed the cymbal and the Levites broke forth into singing. When they reached a break in the singing they blew upon the trumpets and the people prostrated themselves; at every break there was a blowing of the trumpet and at every blowing of the trumpet a prostration. This was the rite of the daily whole offering in the service of the House of our God.” <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Selah<\/span><em>,<\/em> then, would be an instruction for the musicians that the singing was to cease and the instrumentalists were to play.<\/p>\n<p>The term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">higgaion selah<\/span> appears once, in Psalm 9:16. The word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">higgaiaon<\/span> comes from the root <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hagah<\/span><em>,<\/em> “to murmur, to growl, to produce a low sound.” This may have been an instruction for the interlude to be more subdued than a normal <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">selah<\/span><em>.<\/em><\/p>\n<h5>Ancient Melodies in the Titles<\/h5>\n<p>Many psalms contain headings that are not direct musical references but are cue words to suggest well-known tunes. They probably refer either to names or the first words of popular secular songs <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">makams<\/span><em>)<\/em> whose melodic patterns were used in singing the psalm. Many biblical scholars have tried to find hidden meaning in these headings, but most musicologists believe these are simply references or introductions to melodies.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Aijeleth Shahar<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalm 22 (<span>kjv<\/span>), is translated “according to The Hind of the Dawn” (<span>rsv<\/span>), and “To the tune of ‘The Doe of the Morning’ ” (<span>niv<\/span>), “To the tune ‘Doe of the Dawn’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Al-taschith<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalms 57–59 and 75 (<span>kjv<\/span>), is translated “To the tune ‘Do Not Destroy!’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Jonath-elem-rechokim<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalm 56 (<span>kjv<\/span>), is translated “according to The Dove on Far-off Terebinths” (<span>rsv<\/span>), and “To the tune ‘Dove on Distant Oaks’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Mahalath Leannoth<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalm 88, is translated “To the tune ‘The Suffering of Affliction’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Muthlabben<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalm 9, is translated “To the tune ‘Death of the Son’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shoshannim<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalms 45 and 69 (<span>kjv<\/span>), is translated “To the tune ‘Lilies’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shoshannim-Eduth<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalm 80 (<span>kjv<\/span>), is translated “To the tune ‘Lilies of the Covenant’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shushan-eduth<\/span><em>,<\/em> in Psalm 60, is translated “To the tune ‘Lily of the Testimony’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>These melody types appear only in the first three books of the Psalter, and this may imply that these popular <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">makams<\/span> had fallen into disuse by the time the final books of the Psalter were written. Other <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">makam<\/span>-types had probably become popular, and the authors, realizing the relatively short life of a popular tune, did not include them in the headings of the Psalms but left the choice up to the performer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MusicintheNewTestament\">Music in the New Testament<\/p>\n<h5>First-Century Influences<\/h5>\n<h6>The Synagogue<\/h6>\n<p>By the time of Christ, the synagogue had become the chief place of worship for the Jewish people. It began as a place for study of the law but gradually became the center of worship for Jews unable to attend the temple. The liturgical service of the temple could not be duplicated in the synagogue as there was no sacrificial rite, and the music could not be exactly reproduced as there were no trained Levitical singers. Scholars do not agree about the amount of continuity between the music of the temple and the music of the synagogue, but there is evidence that certain musical practices did remain constant between the two places of worship.<\/p>\n<p>Information on the customs and rituals of the synagogue come from Talmudic writings. The musical elements of worship in the synagogue were the chanting of Scripture, psalmody, and spiritual songs. The choral singing of the temple was replaced by a single cantor. The cantor was a layman who, according to tradition, had to have the following qualifications: “He had to be well educated, gifted with a sweet voice, of humble personality, recognized by the community, conversant with Scripture and all the prayers; he must not be a rich man, for his prayers should come from his heart.” His most important job was the cantillation of the Law and the Prophets. A series of accents and punctuations, forerunners of actual musical notation, were indications for the cantor in the musical interpretation of the Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Psalm singing was gradually transplanted from the temple to the synagogue, which in turn influenced the early Christian church. Gregorian psalm tones have their roots in Hebrew psalmody.<\/p>\n<h6>Greek and Roman Cultures<\/h6>\n<p>While both the temple and the synagogue were familiar to the early Christians (Acts 2:46-47; 3:1; 5:42; 9:20; 18:4; etc.), the Greek and Roman cultures also played a major part in shaping the young church. Hellenistic influences by the time of Christ had long been felt in the Middle East, and while it was strongly opposed by some Jewish leaders, the Greek arts had permeated Jewish culture. Greek philosophers considered music a cathartic force that could lead humans into metaphysical knowledge. This understanding led to the belief that music had a moral substance that could influence people to either good or evil. If this philosophy had totally encompassed Judeo-Christian thought, certainly Paul would have encouraged the use of music in the spread of the gospel. However, Paul’s omission of this theory implies that the Judeo-Christian world at that time had rejected the Greek ideal, at least in part.<\/p>\n<p>While the Jewish rabbis considered music an art form for the praise of God, and while the Greek philosophers thought of it as a powerful moral force in creation, the Romans considered music mainly as entertainment. The music of the Roman games was neither religious nor philosophic and, from the accounts of witnesses, it was not technically exceptional. In the Roman Empire musicians were given a lower status and looked on as mere entertainers. One reason the early church did not include instrumental music in their worship was in reaction to the debased secular use of instruments by the Romans.<\/p>\n<h5>In the New Testament Writings<\/h5>\n<p>One of the few mentions of instruments in the NT is the use of flutes at a wake (Mt 9:23). As in the OT, music is associated with feasting and merrymaking (e.g., the return of the prodigal son, Lk 15:25). Five passages mention music metaphorically (Mt 6:2; 11:17; Lk 7:32; 1 Cor 13:1; 14:7-8). The most well known of these is Paul’s celebration of love in 1 Corinthians 13. The denunciation of the gong and cymbals must be understood in light of the attitude of the early Christians toward the music of the Pharisees. Here the signal instruments of the temple were used to represent pompous display of religious pietism.<\/p>\n\n<p>Most references to music are found in the eschatological visions and prophetic passages scattered throughout the NT—most frequently in the book of Revelation (also Mt 24:31; 1 Cor 15:52; 1 Thes 4:16; Heb 12:19). Many of these descriptions have a direct association with musical references in the OT (e.g., the use of harps and trumpets and the singing of the Hallelujah). But the value of many of the passages in Revelation comes from their literary style. These doxological and psalmlike passages were probably spontaneous “spiritual songs” composed by the young church (e.g., Rv 5:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>The passages that mention religious or liturgical music are often more conceptual than literal. Two parallel passages describing the Last Supper (Mt 26:30; Mk 14:26) mention that Christ and his disciples sang a hymn. This is the only direct account of Jesus singing, but it is probable that when he read in the synagogue he did so in the accepted vocal style (Lk 4:16-20). There is much controversy surrounding the actual events at the Last Supper, but we can assume that the hymn sung was a traditional Jewish hymn, probably associated with the Passover.<\/p>\n<p>From the account in Acts 16:25 we know that Paul and Silas sang hymns while in jail. Paul gives instruction for music making in 1 Corinthians 14:15, 26 in terms of a balance between rationalism and emotion. And, as with all the gifts of the Spirit, Paul asks that singing be done for edification.<\/p>\n<p>In two similar passages (Eph 5:19; Col 3:16) Paul groups together three musical terms—psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs. The singing of psalms was an obvious carryover from the synagogue, and we can assume that the early Christian psalm singing followed the Jewish style. The term for “hymns” probably refers to poetic texts, possibly modeled after the psalms, but in praise of Christ. “Spiritual songs” may refer to a spontaneous, ecstatic form of musical prayer, possibly wordless (perhaps related to glossolalia), in a style that was popular in mystical Judaism. These outbursts of song were probably melismatic (sung on one tone) and are perhaps the forerunners of the later Alleluia chant.<\/p>\n<h5>Hymnody in the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>It can be assumed that the early Christians composed hymns in praise of Christ. Logically, most of the hymns found in the NT are based on Hebrew poetic psalm forms, but there is Greek and Latin influence also. The hymns from the Gospel of Luke have become well-known canticles adopted by the church: the Magnificat (Lk 1:46-55), the Benedictus (1:68-79), the Gloria (2:14) and the Nunc Dimittis (2:29-32). While patterned after the psalms of the OT, these hymns are full of confidence in the salvation of Christ and in his imminent return. Other Christological hymns found in the NT include the prologue to the Gospel of John, Ephesians 2:14-16, Philippians 2:6-11, Colossians 1:15-20, 1 Timothy 3:16, Hebrews 1:3, and 1 Peter 3:18-22.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MUSIC A natural human expression that probably began with speech-singing and developed into songs, which were then accompanied by instruments. Music as we know it has become quite complex, a luxury and entertainment; music in antiquity, however, was a functional expression of daily life, work, and worship. The phrase “sing to the Lord,” common to the OT (Ex 15:21; 1 Chr 16:9; Pss 68:32; 96:1-2; Is 42:10; Jer 20:13), was not unique to the Jewish nation. All religions draw on the natural human ...","summary_en":"MUSIC A natural human expression that probably began with speech-singing and developed into songs, which were then accompanied by instruments. Music as we know it has become quite complex, a luxury and entertainment; music in antiquity, however, was a functional expression of daily life, work, and worship. The phrase “sing to the Lord,” common to the OT (Ex 15:21; 1 Chr 16:9; Pss 68:32; 96:1-2; Is 42:10; Jer 20:13), was not unique to the Jewish nation. All religions draw on the natural human ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":20338,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN THE BAPTIST<\/h3>\n<p>Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29, while Jesus was still ministering.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>• Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>• John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>• John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>• Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>• The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BirthInfancyandBoyhood\">Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s Gospel is our only source of information concerning the birth and boyhood of John. The Gospel writer states that John was born in the hill country of Judah (Lk 1:39) of priestly descent, being the son of Zechariah, a priest of the order of Abijah, and Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron (v 5). Both parents were righteous in the sight of God, following all the commandments closely (v 6). Like the birth of Jesus, only to a much lesser degree, the birth of John the Baptist is described in Luke as extraordinary. The angel Gabriel announced the coming birth to Zechariah in the temple; to the older, barren Elizabeth it came as an answer to prayer (vv 8-13). John’s name is announced to Zechariah by the angel, even as his purpose as forerunner is revealed before birth (vv 13-17). Such a consecration from birth is reminiscent of the call of the OT prophet Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>There existed some familial relationship between the families of John and Jesus. Elizabeth is described as a relative of Mary (Lk 1:36), which may connote cousin or aunt, or may only mean being from the same tribe.<\/p>\n<p>John’s childhood, as that of Jesus, is left quite vague in the Gospel account. All that is said is that “John grew up and became strong in spirit. Then he lived out in the wilderness until he began his public ministry to Israel” (Lk 1:80, <span>nlt<\/span>). Some scholars have suggested that John might have been adopted as a boy by the Essenes (as was their practice) at Qumran and reared in their wilderness community, adjacent to the Dead Sea and near the Jordan River. There are some similarities between the activities of the Qumran sect, known through the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the later ministry of John the Baptist. Both practiced a type of asceticism and removed themselves from the life of Jerusalem. Both practiced baptism and associated this rite with initiation and repentance. Finally, John and the Qumran group were both eschatologically minded, awaiting God’s final end-time activity in history. Nevertheless, many significant differences exist between John and the Qumran sect.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AppearanceandIdentity\">Appearance and Identity<\/p>\n<p>Mark’s Gospel begins with an account of John the Baptist’s appearance: “John the Baptist . . . lived in the wilderness and was preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had turned from their sins and turned to God to be forgiven” (Mk 1:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). A rich OT background lies behind John’s association with the wilderness, in this case the wilderness of Judea. It was in the wilderness that God revealed himself to Moses (Ex 3), gave the law, and entered into the covenant with Israel (ch 19). It was also the site of refuge for David (1 Sm 23–26; Ps 63) and Elijah (1 Kgs 19), and in this light became the anticipated site of God’s future deliverance (Is 40:3-5; Ez 47:1-12; Hos 2:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The unusual dress of John the Baptist—“clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist” (Mk 1:6, <span>niv<\/span>)—may have suggested to his audience an association with Elijah in particular (2 Kgs 1:8) or with the prophets in general (Zec 13:4). His diet, “locusts and wild honey” (Mk 1:6), was Levitically clean, reflecting one who lived off the desert (such food was also eaten at Qumran) and formed part of the broader asceticism practiced by John and his disciples (Mt 9:14; 11:18).<\/p>\n<p>Who did John understand himself to be? In answer to questions by the multitude whether he was the Messiah, Elijah, or the expected prophet (Jn 1:20-23), John only identified himself as “a voice crying in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the Lord’ ” (Is 40:3). The background for the question lies at the end of the OT period. Prophecy, on the one hand, was considered to have ceased (Zec 13:2-6); yet, on the other hand, it was expected to appear again before the coming of the messianic kingdom (see Jl 2:28-29; Mal 3:1-4). Some anticipated this final prophet to be one who was like Moses (Dt 18:15), others a returning Elijah as foretold in Malachi 4:5-6. While John personally refrained from identifying himself with these specific expectations (Jn 1:20-23), it is clear that his dress, lifestyle, and message caused the people to identify him with this end-time prophet (Mt 14:5; Mk 11:32). Jesus also saw John as this final “Elijah-like” prophet (Mt 11:7-15), who from Malachi’s prophecy was to be a forerunner to the coming of the Lord (Mal 3:1-4; 4:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsProclamation\">John’s Proclamation<\/p>\n<p>John’s proclamation involved three elements: a warning of imminent judgment at the hands of the Coming One, a call for repentance in light of the coming kingdom of heaven, and a demand to express this repentance in concrete ethical terms. Many Jews looked forward confidently to the messianic judgment as a time of blessing for themselves and destruction for the gentile oppressors. John, however, warned that Jewish ancestry was false security in the coming judgment (Lk 3:8); true repentance was the only means of escaping destruction (Mt 3:2). John anticipated this judgment at the hands of the Coming One, who would baptize the nation with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Lk 3:16). Fire represented the OT means of destruction in the end time (Mal 4:1) as well as purification (Mal 3:1-4), while the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the end time connoted blessing (Is 32:15; Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28) and purification (Is 4:2-4). The judgment anticipated by John was therefore twofold: destruction for the unrepentant, and blessing for the penitent and righteous (Mt 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>In light of this imminent event John called for repentance on the part of his listeners (Mt 3:2), a true “turning back” or “turning toward” God in obedience that would bring forgiveness of sin. Such a turnabout in an individual’s relation with God should be lived out in one’s everyday dealings: fairness on the part of tax collectors (Lk 3:12-13) and soldiers (v 14), and the general requirement of compassion for the poor (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsBaptism\">John’s Baptism<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels record that John baptized those repentant of their sins at several locations: the Jordan River (Mk 1:5), Bethany beyond the Jordan (Jn 1:28), and Aenon near Salim (Jn 3:23). This practice was an integral part of John’s call for repentance, given in light of the approaching judgment and the appearance of the Coming One. The baptism of the penitent symbolized desire for forgiveness of sin, a renunciation of past life, and a desire to be included in the coming messianic kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>What was the background for John’s practice of baptism? From the OT we know of ceremonial lustrations or washings that guaranteed ritual purity (Lv 14–15; Nm 19). Unlike John’s baptism, these washings were repetitive in nature and referred predominantly to ritual rather than moral cleansing. The prophets, however, urged a moral purification associated with the washing of water (Is 1:16-18; Jer 4:14). More significantly, the prophets anticipated a cleansing by God in the end times preceding the Day of Judgment (Ez 36:25; Zec 13:1; cf. Is 44:3), an eschatological element that John may have assumed was being fulfilled in his water baptism.<\/p>\n<p>Another precedent for John’s practice may have been proselyte baptism, a rite (along with circumcision and the offering of sacrifices) that constituted the conversion of a Gentile to Judaism. Common to both proselyte baptism and John’s baptism were the emphasis on an ethical break with the past, a once-for-all character, and the similarity of immersion. Notable differences were that John’s baptism was for Jews, not Gentile converts, and that it had a marked eschatological character as a preparation for the new age. Unless John, in light of the imminence of the messianic age, consciously treated all Jews as “pagan” in need of a baptism of repentance (cf. Mt 3:7-10), it is doubtful that proselyte baptism formed the primary background for John’s baptismal ministry.<\/p>\n<p>If John’s baptism had a clear association with the forgiveness of sin, the question naturally arises as to why Jesus, the Son of God, sought baptism from John. John himself asks this very question of Jesus (Mt 3:14), to which Jesus responds, “It must be done, because we must do everything that is right” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>). First, it is clear that Jesus’ baptism represented an act of obedience on his part to God’s will as he saw it. Second, by submitting to the baptism of John, Jesus was clearly validating the ministry and message of John. The imminent coming of the kingdom and its Messiah, and the need for repentance in anticipation of this event that John proclaimed, were affirmed by Jesus through baptism. Third, by being baptized, Jesus condemned the self-righteous for their lack of repentance and took a stand with the penitent publicans and sinners awaiting the kingdom of God (Lk 7:29-30). Fourth, Jesus stepped forward for baptism not as an individual in need of forgiveness but as one who represented the people of God. His baptism, therefore, demonstrated solidarity with the people in their need of deliverance, even as he is judged in their place on the cross. Finally, the voice from heaven (Mk 1:11) and the descent of the Spirit (Lk 3:21-22) signify the inauguration of Jesus’ own ministry through his baptism by John.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JohnsViewofJesus\">John’s View of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>Throughout his ministry John pointed beyond himself to one “who is far greater than I am—so much greater that I am not even worthy to be his slave” (Mk 1:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). His self-understanding apparently sprang from the application of Isaiah 40:3 to himself, that he was the preparer or forerunner for God’s coming activity through the Messiah (Lk 3:4-6). When asked by curious spectators, John firmly denied that he was the Messiah, and according to the Gospel accounts, subordinated himself to the Coming One (Mk 1:7-8; Jn 1:26-28; 3:28-31). The coming of Jesus to baptism seems to represent the first time John identified these expectations with Jesus himself (Jn 1:35-36). His recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prior to baptism (Mt 3:14) was confirmed by the descent of the Holy Spirit as a dove and the voice from heaven quoting a phrase from an OT messianic psalm (Mk 1:11a, from Ps 2:7), together with a phrase from a Suffering Servant song of Isaiah (Mk 1:11b, from Is 42:1). In the fourth Gospel, John the Baptist goes even further in acknowledging Jesus to be the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29), in anticipation of Jesus’ sacrificial role on the cross. And John recognized him as “God’s Chosen One” (v 34, <span>neb<\/span>—another term for the Messiah; Ps 2:7, see Mk 1:11).<\/p>\n<p>In light of John’s strong affirmation, it is at first difficult to understand his questioning of Jesus while imprisoned: “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Mt 11:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). Some have suggested that John was merely asking for the sake of his disciples, or that the question reflected John’s despondency with being imprisoned. It is more likely, however, that the question represents John’s own confusion with the activity expected of the Messiah. John had proclaimed a Coming One who would bring a baptism of fire and judgment upon the wicked (Lk 3:16). It may have been difficult for him to understand Jesus’ different emphases on forgiveness and acceptance of sinners (Mt 9:9-13) and his healing of the sick (Mt 8–9). When John’s disciples brought their master’s question to Jesus, asking whether or not he was the Messiah, Jesus responded by quoting Isaiah 35:5-6 (see also Is 61:1). This text proclaims the activities of healing and proclaiming salvation to the poor to be fulfillments of the Messiah’s role, even though they may not have been what John or countless other Jews expected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusViewofJohn\">Jesus’ View of John<\/p>\n<p>That Jesus highly regarded John the Baptist is indicated by his baptism by John. It is also explicitly stated on several occasions. Jesus called him the greatest man to have ever lived (Lk 7:28). (Of course, he was not as great as Jesus, the God-man.) Jesus also said that John was a burning and shining lamp (Jn 5:33-35) and that he practiced a baptism divinely ordained (Lk 20:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>John’s uniqueness, however, lies in the fact that he stood at the turning of the ages. He was the last of the old era, the period of the law and the prophets (Lk 16:16), which was to precede the coming of the messianic age (the kingdom of God). John was the last of the prophets, the greatest of them, the Elijah figure who would prepare the way for the judgment of God (Mt 11:13-15; Lk 1:17). Because John belonged to the era of the law and the prophets, however, he was not as great as the “least” already in the kingdom of God (Mt 11:11)—that is, those who belonged to the era of the kingdom’s appearance in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ArrestImprisonmentandMartyrdom\">Arrest, Imprisonment, and Martyrdom<\/p>\n<p>To understand why John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas, one has to grasp the messianic excitement caused by John’s appearance and message (Lk 3:15-18). Herod and other secular rulers were obviously suspicious of anyone who might stir up the crowds with predictions of a coming messianic ruler. Other messianic movements had arisen before John, which resulted in outbreaks of violence against the Roman-Herodian rulership. Moreover, Herod Antipas was under heavy criticism for his marriage with Herodias, the ex-wife of his brother Philip. His first marriage, with the daughter of Aretus II, constituted a political alliance between the Herodian family and the Nabatean kingdom of Perea. His new relationship with Herodias was perceived as a breach of the political alliance and led to friction between the two families. John’s denunciation of Herod’s new marriage (Mt 14:3-12) could thus have been interpreted by Herod as a subversive rousing of sentiment against his authority. The Jewish historian Josephus states that Herod did, in fact, arrest John because he feared John’s influence over the crowds. According to Josephus, John was imprisoned at the fortress Machaerus on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. That he was not killed immediately was due to Herod’s personal fear of the righteous John (Mk 6:2) and of the people’s reaction (Mt 14:5). On a point about which Josephus is silent, the Gospels record that it was Herodias’s feelings against John (Mk 6:17) and her plot, through the dancing of her daughter, which brought about the beheading of John (vv 21-29). John was beheaded at Herodias’s request in approximately <span>AD<\/span> 29 or 30.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheDisciplesofJohn\">The Disciples of John<\/p>\n<p>While it is clear that a band of disciples formed around John in his lifetime (Jn 1:35), to suggest that he intended to begin a continuing movement is contradicted by his message on the imminent Day of Judgment. Apparently, John’s disciples consisted of a small group of those who had been baptized by him and were awaiting the coming Messiah. Some transferred their loyalty to Jesus after John had identified Jesus as the Coming One (Jn 1:37). Others, however, apparently stayed on with their teacher, communicating with the imprisoned John concerning the activities of Jesus (Lk 7:18-23) and, after his death, taking the body for burial (Mk 6:29).<\/p>\n<p>We know little about the activities and practices of the band of disciples clustered around John. We do know, however, that fasting was one practice specifically associated with the group, and one that marked them as similar to the Pharisees (Mt 9:14). In this practice they no doubt followed the example of John himself (Lk 7:33). Prayer and fasting were often linked in late Judaism. The disciples of John were also known for the prayers taught by their master (11:1). Seeing this practice, the disciples of Jesus asked the Lord to teach them to pray, to which Jesus responded with the Lord’s Prayer (vv 2-4).<\/p>\n<p>After his death it is likely that other disciples of John joined the followers of Jesus (see Lk 7:29-30). Not all did so, however, as disciples of John were encountered by Paul and other Christians approximately 25 years later in Ephesus (Acts 18:24–29:7). Upon hearing witness to Jesus, these followers of John proclaimed Jesus as Messiah. When Paul baptized them in the name of Jesus they received the Holy Spirit (19:4-7). Even so, it is apparent from later documents that various groups continued to honor John, even considering him the Messiah, centuries after the NT period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","summary_en":"JOHN THE BAPTIST Forerunner of the Messiah who prepared the people for Jesus’ coming, proclaimed the need for forgiveness of sins, and offered a baptism symbolizing repentance. His ministry included the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River, where he testified to Jesus being the Expected One from God. John was arrested and beheaded by Herod Antipas in approximately AD 29, while Jesus was still ministering. Preview • Birth, Infancy, and Boyhood • Appearance and Identity • John’s Proclamation • ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37847,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"the Unpardonable Sin*","title_en":"the Unpardonable Sin*","content_ro":"<h3>UNPARDONABLE SIN*, The<\/h3>\n<p>Attributing to Satan what is actually the work of the Holy Spirit as demonstrated through Jesus Christ. This sin is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>The unpardonable sin must be defined by its context, which is found in Matthew 12:31-32 and Mark 3:28-30. In these passages, Jesus had just cast a demon from a man who was blind and mute. Incontrovertible evidence of the power of God had just occurred. But the Pharisees, with stubborn unbelief, credited this display of God’s power to Beelzebul, the devil (Mt 12:24). Several Scriptures reveal that many Jews had expressed the same kind of fallacious opinion, namely, that Jesus was performing miracles by the power of the devil (Mt 9:34; 11:18; Lk 7:33; 11:14-20; Jn 7:20; 8:48, 52; 10:20). A group of Jews, mostly Pharisees, were guilty of attributing to the devil what was the work of the Spirit demonstrated through the Lord Jesus. They committed <em>the<\/em> unpardonable sin when they said that Jesus’ actions, performed by the power of the Holy Spirit, originated from Beelzebul, the devil. Put simply, they sinned grievously by boldly characterizing Jesus’ work as coming from the devil. Interestingly, many Jews perpetuated this false characterization about Jesus long after his death. They did not deny that he did miracles; they said he did miracles by the power of the devil.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WhatIsnttheUnpardonableSin\">What Isn’t the Unpardonable Sin<\/p>\n<p>The unpardonable sin is not Israel’s rebellion against God, even though this rebellion resulted in the eternal judgment of thousands and a temporary elimination of God’s blessing. The “sin unto death” mentioned by John (1 Jn 5:16-17) is not the unpardonable sin. It would be impossible for a person who has redemption and the forgiveness of sin (Eph 1:7), cleansing for present and future sin (1 Jn 1:7), and eternal life (Jn 3:16) to commit an unpardonable sin. But those who commit the “sin unto death” are all Christians. First John 5:16 says the person who commits the “sin unto death” is a “brother” in Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The unpardonable sin is not rejection of the Lord Jesus, until the rejecter dies in his unbelief. Such a sin will not be forgiven throughout eternity, but it is not the same sin as that which Jesus condemned with these words: “Anyone who blasphemes against me, the Son of Man, can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, either in this world or in the world to come” (Mt 12:32, <span>nlt<\/span>). Numerous passages repeat the warning that unbelief in the Savior results in eternal death (Jn 3:18, 36; 1 Jn 5:12; Rv 20:15; 21:8), but these Scriptures do not directly speak of the unpardonable sin. Jesus asserted that a person could be an unbeliever in him, even to the degree of speaking against him, yet not be guilty of the unpardonable sin.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Justification, Justified; Sin unto Death.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>UNPARDONABLE SIN*, The<\/h3>\n<p>Attributing to Satan what is actually the work of the Holy Spirit as demonstrated through Jesus Christ. This sin is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>The unpardonable sin must be defined by its context, which is found in Matthew 12:31-32 and Mark 3:28-30. In these passages, Jesus had just cast a demon from a man who was blind and mute. Incontrovertible evidence of the power of God had just occurred. But the Pharisees, with stubborn unbelief, credited this display of God’s power to Beelzebul, the devil (Mt 12:24). Several Scriptures reveal that many Jews had expressed the same kind of fallacious opinion, namely, that Jesus was performing miracles by the power of the devil (Mt 9:34; 11:18; Lk 7:33; 11:14-20; Jn 7:20; 8:48, 52; 10:20). A group of Jews, mostly Pharisees, were guilty of attributing to the devil what was the work of the Spirit demonstrated through the Lord Jesus. They committed <em>the<\/em> unpardonable sin when they said that Jesus’ actions, performed by the power of the Holy Spirit, originated from Beelzebul, the devil. Put simply, they sinned grievously by boldly characterizing Jesus’ work as coming from the devil. Interestingly, many Jews perpetuated this false characterization about Jesus long after his death. They did not deny that he did miracles; they said he did miracles by the power of the devil.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WhatIsnttheUnpardonableSin\">What Isn’t the Unpardonable Sin<\/p>\n<p>The unpardonable sin is not Israel’s rebellion against God, even though this rebellion resulted in the eternal judgment of thousands and a temporary elimination of God’s blessing. The “sin unto death” mentioned by John (1 Jn 5:16-17) is not the unpardonable sin. It would be impossible for a person who has redemption and the forgiveness of sin (Eph 1:7), cleansing for present and future sin (1 Jn 1:7), and eternal life (Jn 3:16) to commit an unpardonable sin. But those who commit the “sin unto death” are all Christians. First John 5:16 says the person who commits the “sin unto death” is a “brother” in Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The unpardonable sin is not rejection of the Lord Jesus, until the rejecter dies in his unbelief. Such a sin will not be forgiven throughout eternity, but it is not the same sin as that which Jesus condemned with these words: “Anyone who blasphemes against me, the Son of Man, can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, either in this world or in the world to come” (Mt 12:32, <span>nlt<\/span>). Numerous passages repeat the warning that unbelief in the Savior results in eternal death (Jn 3:18, 36; 1 Jn 5:12; Rv 20:15; 21:8), but these Scriptures do not directly speak of the unpardonable sin. Jesus asserted that a person could be an unbeliever in him, even to the degree of speaking against him, yet not be guilty of the unpardonable sin.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Justification, Justified; Sin unto Death.<\/p>","summary_ro":"UNPARDONABLE SIN*, The Attributing to Satan what is actually the work of the Holy Spirit as demonstrated through Jesus Christ. This sin is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. The unpardonable sin must be defined by its context, which is found in Matthew 12:31-32 and Mark 3:28-30. In these passages, Jesus had just cast a demon from a man who was blind and mute. Incontrovertible evidence of the power of God had just occurred. But the Pharisees, with stubborn unbelief, credited this display of Go...","summary_en":"UNPARDONABLE SIN*, The Attributing to Satan what is actually the work of the Holy Spirit as demonstrated through Jesus Christ. This sin is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. The unpardonable sin must be defined by its context, which is found in Matthew 12:31-32 and Mark 3:28-30. In these passages, Jesus had just cast a demon from a man who was blind and mute. Incontrovertible evidence of the power of God had just occurred. But the Pharisees, with stubborn unbelief, credited this display of Go...","source":"Articles\/U.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54702,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:18","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:18-19<\/strong> Here Jesus describes the specific ways in which <em>John<\/em> and Jesus offended the present generation. John, who stayed in the wilderness and ate locusts and honey (3:1, 4), was accused of being <em>possessed by a demon<\/em><em>;<\/em> while Jesus, who ate and drank freely, was accused of being a rebellious son (see Deut 21:18-21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:18-19<\/strong> Here Jesus describes the specific ways in which <em>John<\/em> and Jesus offended the present generation. John, who stayed in the wilderness and ate locusts and honey (3:1, 4), was accused of being <em>possessed by a demon<\/em><em>;<\/em> while Jesus, who ate and drank freely, was accused of being a rebellious son (see Deut 21:18-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:18-19 Here Jesus describes the specific ways in which John and Jesus offended the present generation. John, who stayed in the wilderness and ate locusts and honey (3:1, 4), was accused of being possessed by a demon; while Jesus, who ate and drank freely, was accused of being a rebellious son (see Deut 21:18-21).","summary_en":"11:18-19 Here Jesus describes the specific ways in which John and Jesus offended the present generation. John, who stayed in the wilderness and ate locusts and honey (3:1, 4), was accused of being possessed by a demon; while Jesus, who ate and drank freely, was accused of being a rebellious son (see Deut 21:18-21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82328,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:18","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:18-19<\/strong> Here Jesus describes the specific ways in which <em>John<\/em> and Jesus offended the present generation. John, who stayed in the wilderness and ate locusts and honey (3:1, 4), was accused of being <em>possessed by a demon<\/em><em>;<\/em> while Jesus, who ate and drank freely, was accused of being a rebellious son (see Deut 21:18-21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:18-19<\/strong> Here Jesus describes the specific ways in which <em>John<\/em> and Jesus offended the present generation. John, who stayed in the wilderness and ate locusts and honey (3:1, 4), was accused of being <em>possessed by a demon<\/em><em>;<\/em> while Jesus, who ate and drank freely, was accused of being a rebellious son (see Deut 21:18-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:18-19 Here Jesus describes the specific ways in which John and Jesus offended the present generation. John, who stayed in the wilderness and ate locusts and honey (3:1, 4), was accused of being possessed by a demon; while Jesus, who ate and drank freely, was accused of being a rebellious son (see Deut 21:18-21).","summary_en":"11:18-19 Here Jesus describes the specific ways in which John and Jesus offended the present generation. John, who stayed in the wilderness and ate locusts and honey (3:1, 4), was accused of being possessed by a demon; while Jesus, who ate and drank freely, was accused of being a rebellious son (see Deut 21:18-21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":109954,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:18","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:18-19<\/strong> Here Jesus describes the specific ways in which <em>John<\/em> and Jesus offended the present generation. John, who stayed in the wilderness and ate locusts and honey (3:1, 4), was accused of being <em>possessed by a demon<\/em><em>;<\/em> while Jesus, who ate and drank freely, was accused of being a rebellious son (see Deut 21:18-21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:18-19<\/strong> Here Jesus describes the specific ways in which <em>John<\/em> and Jesus offended the present generation. John, who stayed in the wilderness and ate locusts and honey (3:1, 4), was accused of being <em>possessed by a demon<\/em><em>;<\/em> while Jesus, who ate and drank freely, was accused of being a rebellious son (see Deut 21:18-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:18-19 Here Jesus describes the specific ways in which John and Jesus offended the present generation. John, who stayed in the wilderness and ate locusts and honey (3:1, 4), was accused of being possessed by a demon; while Jesus, who ate and drank freely, was accused of being a rebellious son (see Deut 21:18-21).","summary_en":"11:18-19 Here Jesus describes the specific ways in which John and Jesus offended the present generation. John, who stayed in the wilderness and ate locusts and honey (3:1, 4), was accused of being possessed by a demon; while Jesus, who ate and drank freely, was accused of being a rebellious son (see Deut 21:18-21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137580,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:18","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:18-19<\/strong> Here Jesus describes the specific ways in which <em>John<\/em> and Jesus offended the present generation. John, who stayed in the wilderness and ate locusts and honey (3:1, 4), was accused of being <em>possessed by a demon<\/em><em>;<\/em> while Jesus, who ate and drank freely, was accused of being a rebellious son (see Deut 21:18-21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:18-19<\/strong> Here Jesus describes the specific ways in which <em>John<\/em> and Jesus offended the present generation. John, who stayed in the wilderness and ate locusts and honey (3:1, 4), was accused of being <em>possessed by a demon<\/em><em>;<\/em> while Jesus, who ate and drank freely, was accused of being a rebellious son (see Deut 21:18-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:18-19 Here Jesus describes the specific ways in which John and Jesus offended the present generation. John, who stayed in the wilderness and ate locusts and honey (3:1, 4), was accused of being possessed by a demon; while Jesus, who ate and drank freely, was accused of being a rebellious son (see Deut 21:18-21).","summary_en":"11:18-19 Here Jesus describes the specific ways in which John and Jesus offended the present generation. John, who stayed in the wilderness and ate locusts and honey (3:1, 4), was accused of being possessed by a demon; while Jesus, who ate and drank freely, was accused of being a rebellious son (see Deut 21:18-21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":24674,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Matthew (Person)","title_en":"Matthew (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>MATTHEW (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>Son of Alphaeus; a tax collector by occupation; chosen by Jesus to be one of the 12 apostles; credited with the authorship of the Gospel of Matthew.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew is listed in each of the four rosters of the 12 (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13). Aside from these lists, Matthew is mentioned only in the account of his calling (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27). Before his apostolic call, the Gospels refer to Matthew as Levi (Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27; compare Mt 9:9). The identity of Levi as Matthew is beyond all doubt. It is improbable that Matthew was the brother of James the Less whose father was also named Alphaeus (Mt 10:3), since this fact would have been mentioned in the record of Scripture, as it is in the cases of Peter and Andrew and the sons of Zebedee.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew served King Herod Antipas in Capernaum of Galilee, collecting tariffs on goods passing on the road from Damascus to the Mediterranean Sea. To function in this capacity Matthew would have been an educated man, acquainted with the Greek language as well as the native Aramaic, thus qualifying him to write the Gospel of Matthew. As a tax collector, Matthew may have been a man of wealth, but this occupation also caused him to be despised by the Jews and to be considered among the lowest of people. The Pharisees consistently spoke of tax collectors in the same breath with sinners (Mt 11:19; Mk 2:16; Lk 7:34; 15:1).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew was called while he was working at his tax booth. Jesus passed by on the road and said to him, “Follow me” (Mk 2:14). Matthew left everything and did so (Lk 5:28). Immediately he gave Jesus a great banquet at his house, and a large crowd of his fellow tax collectors and others were there to enjoy it. It was at this feast that the Pharisees and their scribes made the well-known complaint “Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?” (Lk 5:30, <span>nlt<\/span> mg).<\/p>\n<p>It is not certain when Matthew was called, but it is probable that the first six disciples were present on that day, since the Pharisees complained to Christ’s disciples during Matthew’s feast. Unlike the first men Jesus called, Matthew was not originally a follower of John the Baptist.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MATTHEW (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>Son of Alphaeus; a tax collector by occupation; chosen by Jesus to be one of the 12 apostles; credited with the authorship of the Gospel of Matthew.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew is listed in each of the four rosters of the 12 (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13). Aside from these lists, Matthew is mentioned only in the account of his calling (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27). Before his apostolic call, the Gospels refer to Matthew as Levi (Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27; compare Mt 9:9). The identity of Levi as Matthew is beyond all doubt. It is improbable that Matthew was the brother of James the Less whose father was also named Alphaeus (Mt 10:3), since this fact would have been mentioned in the record of Scripture, as it is in the cases of Peter and Andrew and the sons of Zebedee.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew served King Herod Antipas in Capernaum of Galilee, collecting tariffs on goods passing on the road from Damascus to the Mediterranean Sea. To function in this capacity Matthew would have been an educated man, acquainted with the Greek language as well as the native Aramaic, thus qualifying him to write the Gospel of Matthew. As a tax collector, Matthew may have been a man of wealth, but this occupation also caused him to be despised by the Jews and to be considered among the lowest of people. The Pharisees consistently spoke of tax collectors in the same breath with sinners (Mt 11:19; Mk 2:16; Lk 7:34; 15:1).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew was called while he was working at his tax booth. Jesus passed by on the road and said to him, “Follow me” (Mk 2:14). Matthew left everything and did so (Lk 5:28). Immediately he gave Jesus a great banquet at his house, and a large crowd of his fellow tax collectors and others were there to enjoy it. It was at this feast that the Pharisees and their scribes made the well-known complaint “Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?” (Lk 5:30, <span>nlt<\/span> mg).<\/p>\n<p>It is not certain when Matthew was called, but it is probable that the first six disciples were present on that day, since the Pharisees complained to Christ’s disciples during Matthew’s feast. Unlike the first men Jesus called, Matthew was not originally a follower of John the Baptist.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MATTHEW (Person) Son of Alphaeus; a tax collector by occupation; chosen by Jesus to be one of the 12 apostles; credited with the authorship of the Gospel of Matthew. Matthew is listed in each of the four rosters of the 12 (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13). Aside from these lists, Matthew is mentioned only in the account of his calling (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27). Before his apostolic call, the Gospels refer to Matthew as Levi (Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27; compare Mt 9:9). The identity of Levi as ...","summary_en":"MATTHEW (Person) Son of Alphaeus; a tax collector by occupation; chosen by Jesus to be one of the 12 apostles; credited with the authorship of the Gospel of Matthew. Matthew is listed in each of the four rosters of the 12 (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13). Aside from these lists, Matthew is mentioned only in the account of his calling (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27). Before his apostolic call, the Gospels refer to Matthew as Levi (Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27; compare Mt 9:9). The identity of Levi as ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35484,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sin","title_en":"Sin","content_ro":"<h3>SIN<\/h3>\n<p>Evildoing that is not only against humanity, society, others, or oneself, but against God. The concept of God, therefore, gives to the idea of sin its many-sided meaning. Other gods, conceived of as capricious and characterless, exercised unlimited power in unbridled behavior; they engendered no such sense of sin as did Israel’s one God, holy, righteous, and utterly good. This religious conception of wrongdoing with the terminology it created persists into the NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Terminology\">Terminology<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s God sets the ideal, the standard for human behavior. The most frequent biblical words for sin speak of violating that standard in some fashion. The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hata’<\/span> and Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hamartia<\/span> meant originally “to miss the mark, fail in duty” (Rom 3:23). As Lawgiver, God sets limits to man’s freedom; another frequent term (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘abar<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">parabasis<\/span>) describes sin as “transgression,” “overstepping set limits.” Similar terms are <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">pesha‘<\/span> (Hebrew), meaning “rebellion,” “transgression”; <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’asham<\/span> (Hebrew) denotes “trespassing God’s kingly prerogative,” “incurring guilt”; <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paraptoma<\/span> (Greek) denotes “a false step out of the appointed way,” “trespass on forbidden ground.” “Iniquity” often translates <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘aon<\/span> (Hebrew, meaning “perverseness,” “wrongness”), for which the nearest NT equivalent is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anomia<\/span> (Greek, “lawlessness”) or <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paranomia<\/span> (Greek, “lawbreaking”).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Genesis traces sin to deliberate misuse of God-given freedom in disobedience of a single limiting prohibition. Ezekiel insists eloquently upon individual responsibility against traditional theories of corporate guilt (Ez 18). Following Jeremiah, he urges the need for a cleansed, renewed inner life if outward behavior is to be reformed; the divine law must become a motivating force within a person if sin is to be overcome (Jer 31:29-34; Ez 36:24-29).<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 51 offers a keen analysis of the inner meaning of sin. By affirming “in sin did my mother conceive me,” the psalmist confessed that his life had been sinful from the first. His whole personality needed “purging”; he was defiled. Ritual sacrifices offer no solution. Only a broken, contrite heart can prepare a sinner for God’s cleansing. The only hope, the sole ground of appeal, lies in God’s steadfast love and abundant mercy. In spite of its rigorous view of sin, the OT also contains gracious assurance of forgiveness (Ps 103:8-14 Is 1:18; 55:6-7).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InJesusTeachings\">In Jesus’ Teachings<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings on the subject of sin took up the gracious offer of divine forgiveness and renewal, not only proclaiming with authority, “Your sins are forgiven,” but showing many acts of compassion and social recognition that he came to be the friend of sinners, calling them to repentance, restoring their hope and dignity (Mt 9:1-13; 11:19; Lk 15; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said little about the origin of sin, except to trace it to the human heart and will (Mt 6:22-23; 7:17-19; 18:7; Mk 7:20-23), but he significantly redefined sin’s scope. Where the law could assess only people’s actions, Jesus showed that anger, contempt, lust, hardness of heart, and deceitfulness are also sinful. He also spoke of sins of neglect, good left undone, the barren tree, the unused talent, the priest ignoring the injured, and the love never shown (Mt 25:41-46). He especially condemns sins against love—unbrotherliness, implacable hostility, selfishness, insensitivity (Lk 12:16-21; 16:19-31). And he condemned self-righteousness and spiritual blindness (Mt 23:16-26; Mk 3:22-30). Jesus spoke of sin as sickness (Mk 2:17) and sometimes as folly (Lk 12:20). Nevertheless, Jesus declared that fallen humans can be cured with God’s help (7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InJohnsWritings\">In John’s Writings<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel assumes sinful humanity’s need, the sacrifice of Christ the Lamb to bear away the sin of the world, and the offer of light and life in Christ. The new note is an emphasis on sin that refuses to accept the salvation provided in Christ, by the love of God for the world—the refusal to believe. It is for loving darkness, rejecting light, and refusing to accept Christ the Savior that humans are judged already (Jn 3:16-21).<\/p>\n<p>Against Gnosticism’s claim that for advanced Christians sin does not matter, 1 John affirms 15 reasons why sin cannot be tolerated in the Christian life and emphasizes again that sin is both ignorance of the truth and lack of love (1 Jn 3:3-10). Yet God forgives those who confess their sins, while Christ atones for their sins and intercedes for them (1:7–2:2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InPaulsWritings\">In Paul’s Writings<\/p>\n<p>Paul argued strongly, from observation and from Scripture, that all have sinned (Rom 1–3). To him, sin is a force, a power, a “law” ruling within people (Rom 5:21; 7:23; 8:2; 1 Cor 15:56), producing all kinds of evil behavior—the hardening of the conscience (Rom 7:21-24), alienation from God, and subjection to death (Rom 5:10; 6:23; Eph 2:1-5, 12; Col 1:21). Humans are helpless to reform themselves (Rom 7:24). Paul’s explanation of this desperate, universal condition is variously interpreted. Some readers think that Romans 5:12-21 says that Adam’s sin is the source of all sin; others, that it is the “similitude” (<span>kjv<\/span>) of all sin. In any event, Paul essentially said that “every man is his own Adam,” which means that each person is fully responsible for his or her sinful condition, even if the sinful nature was inherited from Adam.<\/p>\n<p>The solution to sin, for Paul, lies in the believer’s death with Christ—death to sin, self, the world. Concurrently, the new life of the invasive, effusive Spirit transforms one’s life from within, making each person a new creation by sanctifying the personality into the likeness of Christ (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-9; 6; 8:1-4, 28-29; 2 Cor 5:14-21).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Flesh; Justification, Justified; Sanctification; Sin unto Death; Unpardonable Sin, The.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SIN<\/h3>\n<p>Evildoing that is not only against humanity, society, others, or oneself, but against God. The concept of God, therefore, gives to the idea of sin its many-sided meaning. Other gods, conceived of as capricious and characterless, exercised unlimited power in unbridled behavior; they engendered no such sense of sin as did Israel’s one God, holy, righteous, and utterly good. This religious conception of wrongdoing with the terminology it created persists into the NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Terminology\">Terminology<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s God sets the ideal, the standard for human behavior. The most frequent biblical words for sin speak of violating that standard in some fashion. The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hata’<\/span> and Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hamartia<\/span> meant originally “to miss the mark, fail in duty” (Rom 3:23). As Lawgiver, God sets limits to man’s freedom; another frequent term (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘abar<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">parabasis<\/span>) describes sin as “transgression,” “overstepping set limits.” Similar terms are <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">pesha‘<\/span> (Hebrew), meaning “rebellion,” “transgression”; <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’asham<\/span> (Hebrew) denotes “trespassing God’s kingly prerogative,” “incurring guilt”; <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paraptoma<\/span> (Greek) denotes “a false step out of the appointed way,” “trespass on forbidden ground.” “Iniquity” often translates <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘aon<\/span> (Hebrew, meaning “perverseness,” “wrongness”), for which the nearest NT equivalent is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anomia<\/span> (Greek, “lawlessness”) or <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paranomia<\/span> (Greek, “lawbreaking”).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Genesis traces sin to deliberate misuse of God-given freedom in disobedience of a single limiting prohibition. Ezekiel insists eloquently upon individual responsibility against traditional theories of corporate guilt (Ez 18). Following Jeremiah, he urges the need for a cleansed, renewed inner life if outward behavior is to be reformed; the divine law must become a motivating force within a person if sin is to be overcome (Jer 31:29-34; Ez 36:24-29).<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 51 offers a keen analysis of the inner meaning of sin. By affirming “in sin did my mother conceive me,” the psalmist confessed that his life had been sinful from the first. His whole personality needed “purging”; he was defiled. Ritual sacrifices offer no solution. Only a broken, contrite heart can prepare a sinner for God’s cleansing. The only hope, the sole ground of appeal, lies in God’s steadfast love and abundant mercy. In spite of its rigorous view of sin, the OT also contains gracious assurance of forgiveness (Ps 103:8-14 Is 1:18; 55:6-7).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InJesusTeachings\">In Jesus’ Teachings<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings on the subject of sin took up the gracious offer of divine forgiveness and renewal, not only proclaiming with authority, “Your sins are forgiven,” but showing many acts of compassion and social recognition that he came to be the friend of sinners, calling them to repentance, restoring their hope and dignity (Mt 9:1-13; 11:19; Lk 15; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said little about the origin of sin, except to trace it to the human heart and will (Mt 6:22-23; 7:17-19; 18:7; Mk 7:20-23), but he significantly redefined sin’s scope. Where the law could assess only people’s actions, Jesus showed that anger, contempt, lust, hardness of heart, and deceitfulness are also sinful. He also spoke of sins of neglect, good left undone, the barren tree, the unused talent, the priest ignoring the injured, and the love never shown (Mt 25:41-46). He especially condemns sins against love—unbrotherliness, implacable hostility, selfishness, insensitivity (Lk 12:16-21; 16:19-31). And he condemned self-righteousness and spiritual blindness (Mt 23:16-26; Mk 3:22-30). Jesus spoke of sin as sickness (Mk 2:17) and sometimes as folly (Lk 12:20). Nevertheless, Jesus declared that fallen humans can be cured with God’s help (7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InJohnsWritings\">In John’s Writings<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel assumes sinful humanity’s need, the sacrifice of Christ the Lamb to bear away the sin of the world, and the offer of light and life in Christ. The new note is an emphasis on sin that refuses to accept the salvation provided in Christ, by the love of God for the world—the refusal to believe. It is for loving darkness, rejecting light, and refusing to accept Christ the Savior that humans are judged already (Jn 3:16-21).<\/p>\n<p>Against Gnosticism’s claim that for advanced Christians sin does not matter, 1 John affirms 15 reasons why sin cannot be tolerated in the Christian life and emphasizes again that sin is both ignorance of the truth and lack of love (1 Jn 3:3-10). Yet God forgives those who confess their sins, while Christ atones for their sins and intercedes for them (1:7–2:2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InPaulsWritings\">In Paul’s Writings<\/p>\n<p>Paul argued strongly, from observation and from Scripture, that all have sinned (Rom 1–3). To him, sin is a force, a power, a “law” ruling within people (Rom 5:21; 7:23; 8:2; 1 Cor 15:56), producing all kinds of evil behavior—the hardening of the conscience (Rom 7:21-24), alienation from God, and subjection to death (Rom 5:10; 6:23; Eph 2:1-5, 12; Col 1:21). Humans are helpless to reform themselves (Rom 7:24). Paul’s explanation of this desperate, universal condition is variously interpreted. Some readers think that Romans 5:12-21 says that Adam’s sin is the source of all sin; others, that it is the “similitude” (<span>kjv<\/span>) of all sin. In any event, Paul essentially said that “every man is his own Adam,” which means that each person is fully responsible for his or her sinful condition, even if the sinful nature was inherited from Adam.<\/p>\n<p>The solution to sin, for Paul, lies in the believer’s death with Christ—death to sin, self, the world. Concurrently, the new life of the invasive, effusive Spirit transforms one’s life from within, making each person a new creation by sanctifying the personality into the likeness of Christ (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-9; 6; 8:1-4, 28-29; 2 Cor 5:14-21).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Flesh; Justification, Justified; Sanctification; Sin unto Death; Unpardonable Sin, The.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SIN Evildoing that is not only against humanity, society, others, or oneself, but against God. The concept of God, therefore, gives to the idea of sin its many-sided meaning. Other gods, conceived of as capricious and characterless, exercised unlimited power in unbridled behavior; they engendered no such sense of sin as did Israel’s one God, holy, righteous, and utterly good. This religious conception of wrongdoing with the terminology it created persists into the NT. Terminology Israel’s God...","summary_en":"SIN Evildoing that is not only against humanity, society, others, or oneself, but against God. The concept of God, therefore, gives to the idea of sin its many-sided meaning. Other gods, conceived of as capricious and characterless, exercised unlimited power in unbridled behavior; they engendered no such sense of sin as did Israel’s one God, holy, righteous, and utterly good. This religious conception of wrongdoing with the terminology it created persists into the NT. Terminology Israel’s God...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":36834,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Tax Collector","title_en":"Tax Collector","content_ro":"<h3>TAX COLLECTOR<\/h3>\n<p>One who collected taxes for the government. In NT times the Romans collected a variety of taxes. Their own officers undertook some of this work but also delegated it to private individuals, Jews and others, who were required to return to the authorities an agreed-upon sum. Dishonest individuals collected far more than they were required to pay and became a hated group, especially the Jews who cheated fellow Jews. Zacchaeus, a Jew, was a “chief tax collector” who amassed considerable wealth in the Jericho area (Lk 19:2-10). Such men were regarded as sinners and were often linked in the phrase “tax collectors and sinners” (Mt 9:10-11; 11:19; Mk 2:15-16; Lk 5:30; 19:2-10).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TAX COLLECTOR<\/h3>\n<p>One who collected taxes for the government. In NT times the Romans collected a variety of taxes. Their own officers undertook some of this work but also delegated it to private individuals, Jews and others, who were required to return to the authorities an agreed-upon sum. Dishonest individuals collected far more than they were required to pay and became a hated group, especially the Jews who cheated fellow Jews. Zacchaeus, a Jew, was a “chief tax collector” who amassed considerable wealth in the Jericho area (Lk 19:2-10). Such men were regarded as sinners and were often linked in the phrase “tax collectors and sinners” (Mt 9:10-11; 11:19; Mk 2:15-16; Lk 5:30; 19:2-10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"TAX COLLECTOR One who collected taxes for the government. In NT times the Romans collected a variety of taxes. Their own officers undertook some of this work but also delegated it to private individuals, Jews and others, who were required to return to the authorities an agreed-upon sum. Dishonest individuals collected far more than they were required to pay and became a hated group, especially the Jews who cheated fellow Jews. Zacchaeus, a Jew, was a “chief tax collector” who amassed consider...","summary_en":"TAX COLLECTOR One who collected taxes for the government. In NT times the Romans collected a variety of taxes. Their own officers undertook some of this work but also delegated it to private individuals, Jews and others, who were required to return to the authorities an agreed-upon sum. Dishonest individuals collected far more than they were required to pay and became a hated group, especially the Jews who cheated fellow Jews. Zacchaeus, a Jew, was a “chief tax collector” who amassed consider...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64968,"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":65001,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Eating Together","title_en":"Eating Together","content_ro":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","summary_en":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92594,"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":92627,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Eating Together","title_en":"Eating Together","content_ro":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","summary_en":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120220,"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":120253,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Eating Together","title_en":"Eating Together","content_ro":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","summary_en":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147846,"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":147879,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Eating Together","title_en":"Eating Together","content_ro":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Eating Together<\/h3>\n<p>Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law.<\/p>\n<p>Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharing a meal with another indicated both covenantal and social equality (cp. Matt 26:26-29; 2 Kgs 25:27-30). The Pharisees, believing that separation from such sinners was a necessity for righteousness, were offended by Jesus’ sharing meals with such people (Matt 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:28-32; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ sharing meals with sinful people enacted God’s grace—he extended God’s love and forgiveness, welcoming open participation in a new society. This practice developed into the early Christian communion meals (Acts 2:46; 1 Cor 11:17-34). And as is clear from the Last Supper, the meals Jesus shared with his followers anticipated the feast in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 26:29; see 8:11-12). The apostle Paul extended Jesus’ practice to enable fellowship between Jews and Gentiles in the church (see Gal 2:11-21). Jesus tore down the barriers separating us from one another and from God (Eph 2:14-18) and calls us into fellowship with all his people.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 18:1-8; Exod 24:9-11; 2 Kgs 25:27-30; Matt 8:11-12; 9:10-13; 11:19; 26:26-29; Luke 7:36-50; 15:1-2; 19:1-10; 22:14-21; Acts 2:46-47; 1 Cor 11:20-34; Gal 2:11-16; Eph 2:14-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","summary_en":"Eating Together Eating meals together was a religious matter among the Pharisees and other observant Jews. Righteous Jews enacted many regulations to prevent themselves from being ceremonially defiled at meals. It was not done so much to exclude others as to show commitment to the law. Most Jews lived by the food laws most of the time. Jesus did so, too. But he regularly, purposefully, and offensively ate with those who were ritually unclean or whose commitment to the law was inferior. Sharin...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"20":[{"id":7513,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Conversion","title_en":"Conversion","content_ro":"<h3>CONVERSION<\/h3>\n<p>Total change in one’s direction in life or moral orientation. For Christians this means a change from an orientation that does not take God into account to one in which the person is submitted to Christ. Conversion is the result of repentance.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT conversion is basically a turning or returning from one’s former course of life toward the Lord, the God of Israel. Israel often had to return to their God (Dt 4:30), either as individuals (Ps 51) or as a nation (Jer 4:1); foreign nations needed to turn to God for the first time (Ps 22:27). The characteristic feature is that one turns from wickedness (Jer 26:3; 36:3; Ez 18:21, 27; 33:9, 11), from a life of disloyalty to God to a life of obedience to God (Is 10:20-21; 14:2; Jer 34:15; Hos 14:4). Conversion means a change in inward orientation that finds expression in a changed lifestyle.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT John the Baptist begins the call to conversion (Mt 3:2; Mk 1:4; Lk 3:3), giving a prophetic call for people to change their minds (which is the root meaning of the Greek term) in the light of the nearness of God’s kingdom. This change of life must include a change in actions to prove its reality (Mt 3:8; Lk 3:8). Jesus preached the same message (Mt 4:17; Mk 1:15), adding that since the kingdom had arrived in his person, obedience to him was part of the good news of conversion. Yet it could also be bad news, for one would be damned if he failed to make this radical change (Mt 11:20; Lk 13:3-5). Conversion is radical but also simple, for it requires the simplicity of a child who commits his whole self, not the calculating self-protectiveness of the adult (Mt 18:3).<\/p>\n<p>Outside the Gospels, “conversion” is not a frequently used term except in the book of Acts, where it forms the call to commitment climaxing evangelistic sermons (2:38; 3:19; 8:22), describes the commitment of new Christians to the Lord (9:35; 11:21), and pictures the change of life as a turning from darkness to light (26:18-20). Later writers look back upon conversion (2 Cor 3:16), worry about Christians converting to paganism or Judaism (Gal 4:9), and call for the reconversion of Christians who have left the faith and are in danger of judgment (Jas 5:19-20; Rv 2:5, 16, 22; 3:19).<\/p>\n<p>As in the OT and in the preaching of John and Jesus, conversion has three factors. First, it is a turning <em>from<\/em> something, which includes specific sins, false gods, or simply a life lived for oneself (1 Thes 1:9; Rv 9:20-21; 16:11). Second, conversion is a product of the will of God and his gracious working in the world (Acts 11:18; Rom 2:4; 2 Cor 7:10; 2 Tm 2:25; 2 Pt 3:9). Third, conversion is a turning <em>to<\/em> someone, a commitment of one’s whole life to God in Jesus Christ (Acts 14:15; 1 Thes 1:9; 1 Pt 2:25). It is thus a total reorientation, whether spectacular or undramatic, sudden or gradual, emotional or calm, in which a person transfers his or her total allegiance to God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Faith; Grace; Justification, Justified; Repentance; Sanctification.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CONVERSION<\/h3>\n<p>Total change in one’s direction in life or moral orientation. For Christians this means a change from an orientation that does not take God into account to one in which the person is submitted to Christ. Conversion is the result of repentance.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT conversion is basically a turning or returning from one’s former course of life toward the Lord, the God of Israel. Israel often had to return to their God (Dt 4:30), either as individuals (Ps 51) or as a nation (Jer 4:1); foreign nations needed to turn to God for the first time (Ps 22:27). The characteristic feature is that one turns from wickedness (Jer 26:3; 36:3; Ez 18:21, 27; 33:9, 11), from a life of disloyalty to God to a life of obedience to God (Is 10:20-21; 14:2; Jer 34:15; Hos 14:4). Conversion means a change in inward orientation that finds expression in a changed lifestyle.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT John the Baptist begins the call to conversion (Mt 3:2; Mk 1:4; Lk 3:3), giving a prophetic call for people to change their minds (which is the root meaning of the Greek term) in the light of the nearness of God’s kingdom. This change of life must include a change in actions to prove its reality (Mt 3:8; Lk 3:8). Jesus preached the same message (Mt 4:17; Mk 1:15), adding that since the kingdom had arrived in his person, obedience to him was part of the good news of conversion. Yet it could also be bad news, for one would be damned if he failed to make this radical change (Mt 11:20; Lk 13:3-5). Conversion is radical but also simple, for it requires the simplicity of a child who commits his whole self, not the calculating self-protectiveness of the adult (Mt 18:3).<\/p>\n<p>Outside the Gospels, “conversion” is not a frequently used term except in the book of Acts, where it forms the call to commitment climaxing evangelistic sermons (2:38; 3:19; 8:22), describes the commitment of new Christians to the Lord (9:35; 11:21), and pictures the change of life as a turning from darkness to light (26:18-20). Later writers look back upon conversion (2 Cor 3:16), worry about Christians converting to paganism or Judaism (Gal 4:9), and call for the reconversion of Christians who have left the faith and are in danger of judgment (Jas 5:19-20; Rv 2:5, 16, 22; 3:19).<\/p>\n<p>As in the OT and in the preaching of John and Jesus, conversion has three factors. First, it is a turning <em>from<\/em> something, which includes specific sins, false gods, or simply a life lived for oneself (1 Thes 1:9; Rv 9:20-21; 16:11). Second, conversion is a product of the will of God and his gracious working in the world (Acts 11:18; Rom 2:4; 2 Cor 7:10; 2 Tm 2:25; 2 Pt 3:9). Third, conversion is a turning <em>to<\/em> someone, a commitment of one’s whole life to God in Jesus Christ (Acts 14:15; 1 Thes 1:9; 1 Pt 2:25). It is thus a total reorientation, whether spectacular or undramatic, sudden or gradual, emotional or calm, in which a person transfers his or her total allegiance to God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Faith; Grace; Justification, Justified; Repentance; Sanctification.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CONVERSION Total change in one’s direction in life or moral orientation. For Christians this means a change from an orientation that does not take God into account to one in which the person is submitted to Christ. Conversion is the result of repentance. In the OT conversion is basically a turning or returning from one’s former course of life toward the Lord, the God of Israel. Israel often had to return to their God (Dt 4:30), either as individuals (Ps 51) or as a nation (Jer 4:1); foreign n...","summary_en":"CONVERSION Total change in one’s direction in life or moral orientation. For Christians this means a change from an orientation that does not take God into account to one in which the person is submitted to Christ. Conversion is the result of repentance. In the OT conversion is basically a turning or returning from one’s former course of life toward the Lord, the God of Israel. Israel often had to return to their God (Dt 4:30), either as individuals (Ps 51) or as a nation (Jer 4:1); foreign n...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14568,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel","title_en":"Gospel","content_ro":"<h3>GOSPEL<\/h3>\n<p>Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon <em>godspell<\/em> denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelMessageofIsaiah\">The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his saving action except in his own nature. Israel’s deliverance is undeserved; she is no more worthy of the divine love now than when she went into captivity. In whatever measure she has paid the just due for her past sins (Is 40:2), she remains a sinful people (42:25; 46:12-13; 48:1). It is only by God’s grace that she is saved (55:1-7). By God’s design, Israel’s salvation depends not upon her own righteousness but upon his (41:10; 45:24; 46:13; 51:5-6). There being no righteousness to reward, the Lord acts to <em>create<\/em> righteousness in Israel (45:8; 61:3, 10-11). Yet as these references indicate, salvation is not accomplished at the expense of justice. The penalty for Israel’s sins is to be paid in full. God’s mercy is not hereby called into question. On the contrary, it is precisely here that his mercy is most poignantly expressed, for the penalty is exacted not from his people but from the Servant appointed to stand in their place (53:4-12). Through the Servant’s work, many shall be justified (53:11). The coming of the Evangelist—the preacher of the good news—is predicted in Isaiah 61. He is called the anointed One (v 1) who proclaims the year of the Lord’s favor (v 2). God will be glorified through his preaching (v 3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelintheNewTestament\">The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In only two places (Gal 3:8; Heb 4:2, 6) does the NT speak of the proclamation of the gospel prior to the Christian era. This is quite remarkable, given (1) the unmistakable presence of the gospel in the OT, (2) the extent of gospel terminology in the NT (in the Greek the noun appears 76 times; and the verb, 54), and (3) the fact that the NT presents Christ as the fulfillment of the OT and draws heavily on the OT to interpret his person and work. Not only is it remarkable; it is very significant. It indicates that the NT usage depends not only upon the <em>character<\/em> of the message (truth about salvation) but also upon <em>historical events.<\/em> Almost without exception, the NT restricts its application of gospel terminology to proclamations made during the time of fulfillment—the age in which the salvation promised in the OT is actually accomplished. The NT is preoccupied, not with promises of salvation, but with news of salvation. According to Mark 1:1-4, the gospel “begins” not in the OT but with John the Baptist, in whose work OT prophecy is fulfilled. In Romans 1:1-5 the gospel is represented as a blessing promised in the OT but not actually given until Jesus comes (see also Acts 13:32-33).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGoodNewsofChristsComing\">The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>The promised birth of John the Baptist is good news (Lk 1:19), not only for his parents (vv 7, 24-25) but for all the people: John is sent to prepare them for Messiah’s coming (vv 14-17, 67-79). John’s own preaching is gospel (3:18) for the same reason. The Messiah would be coming to execute judgment, a process that involves both condemnation and salvation (vv 3-17). John’s message is gospel for sinners in that they are warned of impending doom and urged to repent before the ax falls (vv 7-9); it is gospel for the repentant in that they are promised forgiveness (v 3) and membership in Messiah’s community (v 17). The birth of the Savior himself is announced as good news bringing great joy (2:10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelaccordingtoJesus\">The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Kingdom of God<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was authorized by God and anointed by the Spirit to proclaim the gospel (Mk 1:14; Lk 4:18). At the heart of his preaching stands the announcement “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel” (Mk 1:15). (For further references to this gospel, see Mt 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; 26:13; Mk 8:35; 10:29; 13:10; 14:9; Lk 4:43; 8:1; 16:16.) The message is good news for several reasons: (1) The kingdom is coming. The God whom Jesus proclaims is sovereign over all he has made. Yet paradoxically his rule is incomplete: his will is not done on earth as it is in heaven; wrong, not right, prevails. But these conditions are not final, according to Jesus. With the coming of the kingdom, God’s rule will be completed; wrong will be judged, righteousness established, and his people blessed. (2) The kingdom is <em>now<\/em> being inaugurated. “The time is fulfilled,” declares Jesus (Mk 1:15a). The time appointed for the fulfillment of the OT promises has arrived. (3) The consummation of the kingdom is therefore no longer a distant prospect; the full realization of God’s rule is “at hand” (Mk 1:15b). (4) God is establishing his rule for a saving purpose. This is implied in Jesus’ call to repentance (Mk 1:15c). It is especially clear in the passages to which we now turn.<\/p>\n<h5>The Salvation of the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Invited to read the Scripture in the synagogue at Nazareth, Jesus turns to Isaiah 61: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord” (Lk 4:18-19, <span>rsv<\/span>). Having read the prophecy, Jesus announces its fulfillment in his own ministry (v 21). Included among those whom Jesus has come to free are the physically infirm, such as the blind (v 18) and the leprous (v 27) (cf. the references to healing miracles in vv 23, 33-41; the close connection between evangelizing and healing in Mt 4:23; 9:35; 11:5; Lk 7:21-22; 9:6; and the description in Mt 12:22-29; Lk 13:11-16, of the physically afflicted as captives of Satan now liberated by Jesus). Also included are the materially poor—people like the widow helped by Elijah during the famine (Lk 4:25-26). It is the literally poor and hungry whom Jesus pronounces “blessed” in Luke 6:20-21. Yet it is primarily “spiritual” poverty that is in view. Still applying Isaiah 61, Jesus speaks in Matthew 5:3 of the “poor in spirit.” These are people broken and grieved by misery and poverty, oppression and injustice, suffering and death, national apostasy and personal sin—people who in their extremity turn to God and longingly wait for him to bring forth justice, bestow his mercy, and establish his kingdom. It is to just such people that Jesus brings good news (Mt 5:3-10). God sent him to usher in the kingdom, to rescue the lost, to liberate the enslaved, to cure the afflicted, to bind up hearts that are broken, and to forgive the guilty (Mk 2:5, 10, 17; 10:45; Lk 4:18-21; 7:48-49; 15:1-32; 19:10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gift of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>The coming of the kingdom is not the effect or the reward of human effort but God’s answer to the human predicament—the gift of his favor (Lk 12:32). Correspondingly, the explanation for the salvation of the poor lies nowhere but in God’s own character. As the prodigal himself recognized, he hardly deserved to be his father’s servant, much less his son. Nothing he did, not even his repentance, accounted for the father’s love (15:11-32). In the parable of Matthew 20:1-16, it is owing entirely to the goodness of the employer that the last workers to be hired receive a full day’s wages. The first debtor in the story of Matthew 18:23-35 earned nothing but the right to be sold into slavery; instead, the king canceled his enormous debt. The publican, who had nothing to offer God but a confession of sin and plea for mercy, went home justified (Lk 18:13-14). The same holds true for the more virtuous among the poor, such as the persons described in Matthew 5:7-10. Their virtue is real, not imagined. Yet in keeping God’s commands, they do not put him in their debt; they are simply doing their duty (Lk 17:7-10). Furthermore, even the most merciful need divine mercy (Mt 5:7). For even those most zealous to obey God’s law are unable to fulfill all its requirements (cf. 11:28-30). The first servant in Matthew 18:23-35 owes far more money than someone in such a situation could possibly pay—which serves to magnify the generosity of the king. Grace depends for its exercise upon the inability of its objects (Lk 14:12-14).<\/p>\n<h5>The Call to Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The Israelites are without exception a sinful people, all of them needing the salvation that Jesus brings (Mt 1:21; Lk 1:77). In demonstration of God’s grace, Jesus proclaimed his gospel to the entire nation (Mt 4:23; 9:35; 15:24; Lk 4:43; 9:6; 20:1). From the most respectable to the least, all are summoned to submit to God’s rule, all are invited to come and partake freely of the banquet he has spread (Lk 14:16-24). But the gift of salvation must be received if it is to be experienced (Mk 10:15). And while it is indeed a gift that costs nothing, it is also a priceless treasure for which a wise person will freely sacrifice everything else (Mt 13:44-46), a sacrifice exceeded only by the cost of rejecting the gospel (Mt 11:20-24; Mk 8:34-39; Lk 14:24, 33). “Repent and believe in the gospel,” Jesus commands (Mk 1:15). The self-righteous and the self-sufficient must be jolted out of their false sense of security and humbly recognize their need for God (Lk 6:24-26). Only then will Jesus’ message to the poor be seen as gospel. An announcement of liberation (4:18-19) is good news only to people who are enslaved and know they are. The command applies also to the destitute and the afflicted. Those among them who bemoan their lot must repent of their sins. But something further is needed for the response to be complete: a person cannot believe Jesus’ gospel without a commitment to the <em>Person<\/em> of Christ (Jn 3:16). Even those who are already “poor in spirit,” in the sense defined earlier, are not really “blessed” until they acknowledge the truth of Jesus’ claims (Mt 11:6) and commit themselves to a life of obedience on his terms (7:21-27). This prepares us for the next point.<\/p>\n<h5>Summary<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout Jesus’ earthly ministry, the theme of his gospel remains the dawning of God’s kingdom (Mt 4:23; 24:14; Lk 4:43; 16:16), a message that is preached almost exclusively to Jews (Mt 10:5-6; 15:24). Yet Jesus also provides glimpses into what the gospel was to become once his work on earth was accomplished: (1) In Mark 8:35 and 10:29 Jesus speaks of individuals who needed to make great sacrifices “for my sake and for the gospel.” While distinguished from each other, the person of Jesus and the gospel are here associated in the closest possible way. The time was approaching when the Proclaimer of the gospel would become the Proclaimed. (2) In Mark 13:10 and Matthew 24:14 (and the textually doubtful Mk 16:15) Jesus foretells the preaching of the gospel of the kingdom to the gentile nations. (3) In Mark 14, having interpreted a woman’s action (v 3) as an anointing of his body beforehand for burial (v 8), Jesus declares, “And truly, I say to you, wherever the gospel is preached in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her” (v 9, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 26:13). This statement strongly implies that both the person of Jesus and the event of his death will figure prominently in the message that is to be proclaimed; otherwise, it is strange that the gospel and this particular act should be so solemnly bound together. Thus, here in the text already is an indication of how crucial Jesus’ death is both for the provision of the salvation announced in his gospel (cf. Mk 14:22-24) and for the launching of the evangelistic mission to the Gentiles (Mt 20:28 is vital for explaining the shift from Mt 15:24 to 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelafterJesusResurrection\">The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p>After the resurrection of Jesus, the gospel was proclaimed by his eyewitnesses. The contents of this gospel are recorded in the book of Acts and in Paul’s letters. Of the 43 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelizomai<\/span> (“evangelize”) beyond the Gospels, 15 occur in Acts and 21 in Paul’s writings; of the 64 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelion<\/span> (“gospel”), 2 occur in Acts and no fewer than 60 in Paul.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Having risen from the dead, Jesus Christ again evangelizes (Eph 2:16-17), doing so now through his appointed representatives (Rom 15:16-18; 1 Cor 1:17; 9:12-18; Gal 4:13-14; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:9-11). More than that, Christ has become the central theme of the gospel; the Proclaimer is now the Proclaimed. This is repeatedly affirmed in Acts (5:42; 8:4-5, 35; 11:20; 17:18) and in Paul’s writings (Rom 1:1-4; 10:8-17; 15:19-20; 2 Cor 4:4-6; 11:4; Gal 1:16; Eph 3:8; Phil 1:15-18; 2 Tm 2:8). The NT always speaks of <em>the gospel<\/em>—never the gospels—of Christ. A second gospel is as inconceivable and as unnecessary as a second Christ. This is the one gospel that God authorizes (e.g., Rom 1:1-17) and proclaims (e.g., 2 Thes 2:13-14). Galatians 2:7-9 speaks not of two gospels but of two mission fields. Paul (the apostle to the uncircumcised) and Peter (the apostle to the circumcised) are both entrusted with “the gospel of Christ” (Gal 1:7; cf. 1 Cor 15:1-11), the message that God has ordained for the salvation of Jews and Gentiles alike (Rom 1:16). The “different gospel” that Paul denounces in Galatians 1:6-9 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is not another gospel about Jesus but a message about “another Jesus”—not the real one, but one who exists only in the minds and the messages of those who proclaim him. To preach the true Christ is to preach the true gospel, however questionable one’s motives (Phil 1:15-18, 27), and to respond rightly to the gospel is to turn to Christ (Acts 11:20-21; Rom 10:8-17; Gal 2:14-16).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Witness to Saving Events<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel bears witness to every aspect of Christ’s saving work, from his birth (Rom 1:3; 2 Tm 2:8) and public ministry (Mk 1:1; Acts 10:36-38) to his second coming (Col 1:5, 23; cf. 3:1-4; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and the last judgment (Rom 2:16). But it is the death and the resurrection of Christ that are most crucial for the accomplishment of salvation, and that are therefore most prominent in the gospel’s witness. These are the events with which Mark’s proclamation climaxes (chs 15–16), and for which everything else prepares (8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34; 12:6-8); special stress is placed upon Jesus’ death as the means of salvation from sin (10:45; 14:3-9, 22-24). In Paul’s gospel, too, the death and resurrection of Jesus are central (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:1-4), with the cross occupying the very center (1 Cor 1:17–2:5). Had Christ not risen from the dead, Paul argues, the preaching of the cross would be a waste of time (1 Cor 15:14, 17; cf. Rom 6:3-11). However, now that Christ has risen, his death deserves special emphasis as the place where God provides atonement for sins (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 2 Cor 5:14-21; Eph 1:7). The gospel according to Acts proclaims Jesus’ death (Acts 8:25; 20:24, 28; cf. 10:36-43) and preeminently his resurrection, the event by which he conquered death and was exalted as Lord and coming Judge (10:36-43; 13:32-33; 17:18, 31). According to 1 Peter, the bearers of the gospel (1 Pt 1:12) concentrated, as had the OT prophets, on “the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glory” (1:11; cf. 1:18-19; 2:21-24; 3:18-22).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Power for Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel is much more than a report of past events and an exposition of doctrine. Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 1:17-18 and again in Romans 1:16 that the gospel is “the power of God”—not merely a witness to his power but an <em>expression<\/em> of his power. Thus, it cannot be fettered (2 Tm 2:8-9). “Our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power,” Paul writes in 1 Thessalonians 1:5. His point is not that the gospel was accompanied by mighty works (though this happened; cf. Rom 15:18-19), but that the gospel itself is a mighty work. God makes it so through his Holy Spirit (Rom 15:18-19; 1 Cor 2:1-5; 1 Thes 1:6). Furthermore, God’s singular purpose in exercising his power is to change people’s lives, to liberate them from sin and death, and to reconcile them to himself—in short, to save them. The gospel has power to effect the salvation it announces and to impart the life it promises (e.g., Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-18; 15:1-2; Eph 1:13; 2 Thes 2:13-14; 2 Tm 1:8-11; 1 Pt 1:23-25). If people are to experience salvation, they must hear and believe the gospel. It is precisely in and through this message that the saving power manifested in the person and work of Christ (especially in his death and resurrection) is conveyed to men and made effective in their lives. Similarly it is in association with the gospel, or as a direct result of the reception of the gospel, that the Holy Spirit is imparted to believers (Acts 10:36-44; 15:7-8; 2 Cor 11:4; Gal 3:1-2). In short, the gospel is the decisive place of encounter between the sinner and God the Savior.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>According to Peter’s testimony at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:7-11), an essential part of the gospel—for Gentiles and Jews alike—is salvation “through the grace of the Lord Jesus.” Toward the close of his missionary career, Paul states that his basic concern has been “to testify to the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24, <span>rsv<\/span>). This statement can be understood only in relation to Paul’s concept of the righteousness of God, particularly as set forth in Romans. Paul is here not merely expounding a divine attribute. Rather, he is dramatizing a divine activity—the manifestation of God’s righteousness now, “in the present time” (Rom 3:26), in the new age inaugurated by the coming of Jesus. The manifestation is twofold. Viewing the two aspects together, and doing so in the light of the gospel declared by Isaiah and by Jesus (both of whom strongly influenced Paul), respectively, will help us to understand why Paul speaks of “the gospel of the grace of God.”<\/p>\n<p>First, the gospel is a <em>witness<\/em> to God’s grace. In offering his Son as a sacrifice for sins (Rom 3:25a), God demonstrates his righteousness (vv 25b-26). That is, in the death of Jesus sins formerly “passed over” (v 25c) become the object of God’s wrath (cf. 1:18) and judgment. Yet in the very place where God deals justly and decisively with sins, he shows his grace to sinners. For the judgment against sin is focused not upon the sinners themselves but upon the One appointed to act on their behalf and to stand in their place (Rom 4:25; 5:6, 11; cf. 2 Cor 5:21; Gal 3:13). On this basis, sinners are freely pardoned (Rom 3:24). “The grace of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 15:11) toward the sinful is also in evidence, for he willingly bears their iniquities and suffers the consequences of their wrongdoing (Gal 2:20; cf. 2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the gospel is a <em>channel<\/em> of God’s grace. “The righteousness of God is revealed” in the gospel, says Paul (Rom 1:17). By this he means, not that the gospel talks about the righteousness of God (though it does), but that God’s righteousness is actively at work in the gospel. This activity in turn explains how the gospel becomes “the power of God for salvation” (v 16). And just how does God demonstrate his righteousness at this stage? In short, by bestowing it as a free gift on sinful human beings. It remains the righteousness of God, but by God’s grace, it is a righteousness in which humans may share. Furthermore, partaking of God’s righteousness depends on being personally united with Jesus Christ. In Paul’s view the saved person is one who has been acquitted, justified, “declared righteous” by God the judge. The basis for the verdict is not that I in myself am righteous (God justifies the ungodly, Rom 4:5). Nor does God treat me as though I were righteous. According to Paul I am declared righteous because I really <em>am<\/em> righteous—not in myself but in Christ (1 Cor 1:30; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9). This union is established through the revelation—and the free offer—of God’s righteousness in the gospel (Rom 1:16-17).<\/p>\n<h5>Responding to the Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel calls for a threefold response:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>Believing.<\/em> The gospel, says Paul, is “the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith” (Rom 1:16). For Paul, faith is the abandonment of all reliance upon “works of law” for justification (3:28) and utter dependence upon the grace of God as demonstrated in the work of Christ, especially his death (v 25). Accordingly, the “different gospel” of Galatians 1:6 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is spurious, for it preaches salvation by personal merit rather than (or together with) the work of Christ (cf. Gal 2:16). Ultimately faith rests upon God (Rom 4:24; 1 Thes 1:8-9) and upon Christ (Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 2:16, 20). Yet it is imperative that one believe the gospel also (Acts 8:12; 11:20-21; 15:7; Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-24; Phil 1:27; Heb 4:2), for it is just by this means that God’s salvation is made known and mediated. Moreover, believing the gospel entails repentance (Acts 14:15; 20:21, 24; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and obedience (Rom 1:5; 15:16-18; Heb 4:6). Those who refuse to obey the gospel are imperiling their lives (2 Thes 1:5-10; 1 Pt 4:17).<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Growing.<\/em> The Gospel is more than a message to be received—it is also a place in which to stand (1 Cor 15:1-2). It is sustainer of life as well as giver of life. One grows as a Christian not by turning from the gospel to other things (to turn away from the gospel is to abandon God and Christ, Gal 1:6), but by going ever more deeply into the gospel. In Romans 1:15 Paul expresses his eagerness to proclaim the gospel to the Christians in Rome. In the following chapters, anticipating his visit, he offers one of his most profound expositions of the gospel—one whose truth has never been fathomed and whose power has never been exhausted.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Hoping.<\/em> “The hope of the gospel” (Col 1:23) includes not only the return of Christ and the glory of heaven (Col 1:5; 3:1-4; 2 Thes 2:14-16) but the final judgment as well. For those who embrace the gospel, the last judgment holds no terrors, because the Judge is the very one who rescues them from the wrath to come (1 Thes 1:10). Those who are united to him need not dread condemnation now or at the end (Rom 8:1). Instead, the last judgment will mark their final vindication (1 Cor 4:5; Gal 5:5). Accordingly, this theme is not just a corollary but an integral part of the Good News (Rom 2:16). Those who have died since believing the gospel (1 Pt 4:6) may seem to have suffered a fate common to all people, or even the condemnation reserved for the lawless; in fact, their response to the gospel assures them of approval by the coming Lord (4:5-6; 5:4) and of a share in the imperishable inheritance of heaven (1:4).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GOSPEL<\/h3>\n<p>Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon <em>godspell<\/em> denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelMessageofIsaiah\">The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his saving action except in his own nature. Israel’s deliverance is undeserved; she is no more worthy of the divine love now than when she went into captivity. In whatever measure she has paid the just due for her past sins (Is 40:2), she remains a sinful people (42:25; 46:12-13; 48:1). It is only by God’s grace that she is saved (55:1-7). By God’s design, Israel’s salvation depends not upon her own righteousness but upon his (41:10; 45:24; 46:13; 51:5-6). There being no righteousness to reward, the Lord acts to <em>create<\/em> righteousness in Israel (45:8; 61:3, 10-11). Yet as these references indicate, salvation is not accomplished at the expense of justice. The penalty for Israel’s sins is to be paid in full. God’s mercy is not hereby called into question. On the contrary, it is precisely here that his mercy is most poignantly expressed, for the penalty is exacted not from his people but from the Servant appointed to stand in their place (53:4-12). Through the Servant’s work, many shall be justified (53:11). The coming of the Evangelist—the preacher of the good news—is predicted in Isaiah 61. He is called the anointed One (v 1) who proclaims the year of the Lord’s favor (v 2). God will be glorified through his preaching (v 3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelintheNewTestament\">The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In only two places (Gal 3:8; Heb 4:2, 6) does the NT speak of the proclamation of the gospel prior to the Christian era. This is quite remarkable, given (1) the unmistakable presence of the gospel in the OT, (2) the extent of gospel terminology in the NT (in the Greek the noun appears 76 times; and the verb, 54), and (3) the fact that the NT presents Christ as the fulfillment of the OT and draws heavily on the OT to interpret his person and work. Not only is it remarkable; it is very significant. It indicates that the NT usage depends not only upon the <em>character<\/em> of the message (truth about salvation) but also upon <em>historical events.<\/em> Almost without exception, the NT restricts its application of gospel terminology to proclamations made during the time of fulfillment—the age in which the salvation promised in the OT is actually accomplished. The NT is preoccupied, not with promises of salvation, but with news of salvation. According to Mark 1:1-4, the gospel “begins” not in the OT but with John the Baptist, in whose work OT prophecy is fulfilled. In Romans 1:1-5 the gospel is represented as a blessing promised in the OT but not actually given until Jesus comes (see also Acts 13:32-33).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGoodNewsofChristsComing\">The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>The promised birth of John the Baptist is good news (Lk 1:19), not only for his parents (vv 7, 24-25) but for all the people: John is sent to prepare them for Messiah’s coming (vv 14-17, 67-79). John’s own preaching is gospel (3:18) for the same reason. The Messiah would be coming to execute judgment, a process that involves both condemnation and salvation (vv 3-17). John’s message is gospel for sinners in that they are warned of impending doom and urged to repent before the ax falls (vv 7-9); it is gospel for the repentant in that they are promised forgiveness (v 3) and membership in Messiah’s community (v 17). The birth of the Savior himself is announced as good news bringing great joy (2:10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelaccordingtoJesus\">The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Kingdom of God<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was authorized by God and anointed by the Spirit to proclaim the gospel (Mk 1:14; Lk 4:18). At the heart of his preaching stands the announcement “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel” (Mk 1:15). (For further references to this gospel, see Mt 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; 26:13; Mk 8:35; 10:29; 13:10; 14:9; Lk 4:43; 8:1; 16:16.) The message is good news for several reasons: (1) The kingdom is coming. The God whom Jesus proclaims is sovereign over all he has made. Yet paradoxically his rule is incomplete: his will is not done on earth as it is in heaven; wrong, not right, prevails. But these conditions are not final, according to Jesus. With the coming of the kingdom, God’s rule will be completed; wrong will be judged, righteousness established, and his people blessed. (2) The kingdom is <em>now<\/em> being inaugurated. “The time is fulfilled,” declares Jesus (Mk 1:15a). The time appointed for the fulfillment of the OT promises has arrived. (3) The consummation of the kingdom is therefore no longer a distant prospect; the full realization of God’s rule is “at hand” (Mk 1:15b). (4) God is establishing his rule for a saving purpose. This is implied in Jesus’ call to repentance (Mk 1:15c). It is especially clear in the passages to which we now turn.<\/p>\n<h5>The Salvation of the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Invited to read the Scripture in the synagogue at Nazareth, Jesus turns to Isaiah 61: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord” (Lk 4:18-19, <span>rsv<\/span>). Having read the prophecy, Jesus announces its fulfillment in his own ministry (v 21). Included among those whom Jesus has come to free are the physically infirm, such as the blind (v 18) and the leprous (v 27) (cf. the references to healing miracles in vv 23, 33-41; the close connection between evangelizing and healing in Mt 4:23; 9:35; 11:5; Lk 7:21-22; 9:6; and the description in Mt 12:22-29; Lk 13:11-16, of the physically afflicted as captives of Satan now liberated by Jesus). Also included are the materially poor—people like the widow helped by Elijah during the famine (Lk 4:25-26). It is the literally poor and hungry whom Jesus pronounces “blessed” in Luke 6:20-21. Yet it is primarily “spiritual” poverty that is in view. Still applying Isaiah 61, Jesus speaks in Matthew 5:3 of the “poor in spirit.” These are people broken and grieved by misery and poverty, oppression and injustice, suffering and death, national apostasy and personal sin—people who in their extremity turn to God and longingly wait for him to bring forth justice, bestow his mercy, and establish his kingdom. It is to just such people that Jesus brings good news (Mt 5:3-10). God sent him to usher in the kingdom, to rescue the lost, to liberate the enslaved, to cure the afflicted, to bind up hearts that are broken, and to forgive the guilty (Mk 2:5, 10, 17; 10:45; Lk 4:18-21; 7:48-49; 15:1-32; 19:10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gift of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>The coming of the kingdom is not the effect or the reward of human effort but God’s answer to the human predicament—the gift of his favor (Lk 12:32). Correspondingly, the explanation for the salvation of the poor lies nowhere but in God’s own character. As the prodigal himself recognized, he hardly deserved to be his father’s servant, much less his son. Nothing he did, not even his repentance, accounted for the father’s love (15:11-32). In the parable of Matthew 20:1-16, it is owing entirely to the goodness of the employer that the last workers to be hired receive a full day’s wages. The first debtor in the story of Matthew 18:23-35 earned nothing but the right to be sold into slavery; instead, the king canceled his enormous debt. The publican, who had nothing to offer God but a confession of sin and plea for mercy, went home justified (Lk 18:13-14). The same holds true for the more virtuous among the poor, such as the persons described in Matthew 5:7-10. Their virtue is real, not imagined. Yet in keeping God’s commands, they do not put him in their debt; they are simply doing their duty (Lk 17:7-10). Furthermore, even the most merciful need divine mercy (Mt 5:7). For even those most zealous to obey God’s law are unable to fulfill all its requirements (cf. 11:28-30). The first servant in Matthew 18:23-35 owes far more money than someone in such a situation could possibly pay—which serves to magnify the generosity of the king. Grace depends for its exercise upon the inability of its objects (Lk 14:12-14).<\/p>\n<h5>The Call to Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The Israelites are without exception a sinful people, all of them needing the salvation that Jesus brings (Mt 1:21; Lk 1:77). In demonstration of God’s grace, Jesus proclaimed his gospel to the entire nation (Mt 4:23; 9:35; 15:24; Lk 4:43; 9:6; 20:1). From the most respectable to the least, all are summoned to submit to God’s rule, all are invited to come and partake freely of the banquet he has spread (Lk 14:16-24). But the gift of salvation must be received if it is to be experienced (Mk 10:15). And while it is indeed a gift that costs nothing, it is also a priceless treasure for which a wise person will freely sacrifice everything else (Mt 13:44-46), a sacrifice exceeded only by the cost of rejecting the gospel (Mt 11:20-24; Mk 8:34-39; Lk 14:24, 33). “Repent and believe in the gospel,” Jesus commands (Mk 1:15). The self-righteous and the self-sufficient must be jolted out of their false sense of security and humbly recognize their need for God (Lk 6:24-26). Only then will Jesus’ message to the poor be seen as gospel. An announcement of liberation (4:18-19) is good news only to people who are enslaved and know they are. The command applies also to the destitute and the afflicted. Those among them who bemoan their lot must repent of their sins. But something further is needed for the response to be complete: a person cannot believe Jesus’ gospel without a commitment to the <em>Person<\/em> of Christ (Jn 3:16). Even those who are already “poor in spirit,” in the sense defined earlier, are not really “blessed” until they acknowledge the truth of Jesus’ claims (Mt 11:6) and commit themselves to a life of obedience on his terms (7:21-27). This prepares us for the next point.<\/p>\n<h5>Summary<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout Jesus’ earthly ministry, the theme of his gospel remains the dawning of God’s kingdom (Mt 4:23; 24:14; Lk 4:43; 16:16), a message that is preached almost exclusively to Jews (Mt 10:5-6; 15:24). Yet Jesus also provides glimpses into what the gospel was to become once his work on earth was accomplished: (1) In Mark 8:35 and 10:29 Jesus speaks of individuals who needed to make great sacrifices “for my sake and for the gospel.” While distinguished from each other, the person of Jesus and the gospel are here associated in the closest possible way. The time was approaching when the Proclaimer of the gospel would become the Proclaimed. (2) In Mark 13:10 and Matthew 24:14 (and the textually doubtful Mk 16:15) Jesus foretells the preaching of the gospel of the kingdom to the gentile nations. (3) In Mark 14, having interpreted a woman’s action (v 3) as an anointing of his body beforehand for burial (v 8), Jesus declares, “And truly, I say to you, wherever the gospel is preached in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her” (v 9, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 26:13). This statement strongly implies that both the person of Jesus and the event of his death will figure prominently in the message that is to be proclaimed; otherwise, it is strange that the gospel and this particular act should be so solemnly bound together. Thus, here in the text already is an indication of how crucial Jesus’ death is both for the provision of the salvation announced in his gospel (cf. Mk 14:22-24) and for the launching of the evangelistic mission to the Gentiles (Mt 20:28 is vital for explaining the shift from Mt 15:24 to 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelafterJesusResurrection\">The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p>After the resurrection of Jesus, the gospel was proclaimed by his eyewitnesses. The contents of this gospel are recorded in the book of Acts and in Paul’s letters. Of the 43 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelizomai<\/span> (“evangelize”) beyond the Gospels, 15 occur in Acts and 21 in Paul’s writings; of the 64 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelion<\/span> (“gospel”), 2 occur in Acts and no fewer than 60 in Paul.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Having risen from the dead, Jesus Christ again evangelizes (Eph 2:16-17), doing so now through his appointed representatives (Rom 15:16-18; 1 Cor 1:17; 9:12-18; Gal 4:13-14; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:9-11). More than that, Christ has become the central theme of the gospel; the Proclaimer is now the Proclaimed. This is repeatedly affirmed in Acts (5:42; 8:4-5, 35; 11:20; 17:18) and in Paul’s writings (Rom 1:1-4; 10:8-17; 15:19-20; 2 Cor 4:4-6; 11:4; Gal 1:16; Eph 3:8; Phil 1:15-18; 2 Tm 2:8). The NT always speaks of <em>the gospel<\/em>—never the gospels—of Christ. A second gospel is as inconceivable and as unnecessary as a second Christ. This is the one gospel that God authorizes (e.g., Rom 1:1-17) and proclaims (e.g., 2 Thes 2:13-14). Galatians 2:7-9 speaks not of two gospels but of two mission fields. Paul (the apostle to the uncircumcised) and Peter (the apostle to the circumcised) are both entrusted with “the gospel of Christ” (Gal 1:7; cf. 1 Cor 15:1-11), the message that God has ordained for the salvation of Jews and Gentiles alike (Rom 1:16). The “different gospel” that Paul denounces in Galatians 1:6-9 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is not another gospel about Jesus but a message about “another Jesus”—not the real one, but one who exists only in the minds and the messages of those who proclaim him. To preach the true Christ is to preach the true gospel, however questionable one’s motives (Phil 1:15-18, 27), and to respond rightly to the gospel is to turn to Christ (Acts 11:20-21; Rom 10:8-17; Gal 2:14-16).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Witness to Saving Events<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel bears witness to every aspect of Christ’s saving work, from his birth (Rom 1:3; 2 Tm 2:8) and public ministry (Mk 1:1; Acts 10:36-38) to his second coming (Col 1:5, 23; cf. 3:1-4; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and the last judgment (Rom 2:16). But it is the death and the resurrection of Christ that are most crucial for the accomplishment of salvation, and that are therefore most prominent in the gospel’s witness. These are the events with which Mark’s proclamation climaxes (chs 15–16), and for which everything else prepares (8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34; 12:6-8); special stress is placed upon Jesus’ death as the means of salvation from sin (10:45; 14:3-9, 22-24). In Paul’s gospel, too, the death and resurrection of Jesus are central (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:1-4), with the cross occupying the very center (1 Cor 1:17–2:5). Had Christ not risen from the dead, Paul argues, the preaching of the cross would be a waste of time (1 Cor 15:14, 17; cf. Rom 6:3-11). However, now that Christ has risen, his death deserves special emphasis as the place where God provides atonement for sins (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 2 Cor 5:14-21; Eph 1:7). The gospel according to Acts proclaims Jesus’ death (Acts 8:25; 20:24, 28; cf. 10:36-43) and preeminently his resurrection, the event by which he conquered death and was exalted as Lord and coming Judge (10:36-43; 13:32-33; 17:18, 31). According to 1 Peter, the bearers of the gospel (1 Pt 1:12) concentrated, as had the OT prophets, on “the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glory” (1:11; cf. 1:18-19; 2:21-24; 3:18-22).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Power for Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel is much more than a report of past events and an exposition of doctrine. Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 1:17-18 and again in Romans 1:16 that the gospel is “the power of God”—not merely a witness to his power but an <em>expression<\/em> of his power. Thus, it cannot be fettered (2 Tm 2:8-9). “Our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power,” Paul writes in 1 Thessalonians 1:5. His point is not that the gospel was accompanied by mighty works (though this happened; cf. Rom 15:18-19), but that the gospel itself is a mighty work. God makes it so through his Holy Spirit (Rom 15:18-19; 1 Cor 2:1-5; 1 Thes 1:6). Furthermore, God’s singular purpose in exercising his power is to change people’s lives, to liberate them from sin and death, and to reconcile them to himself—in short, to save them. The gospel has power to effect the salvation it announces and to impart the life it promises (e.g., Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-18; 15:1-2; Eph 1:13; 2 Thes 2:13-14; 2 Tm 1:8-11; 1 Pt 1:23-25). If people are to experience salvation, they must hear and believe the gospel. It is precisely in and through this message that the saving power manifested in the person and work of Christ (especially in his death and resurrection) is conveyed to men and made effective in their lives. Similarly it is in association with the gospel, or as a direct result of the reception of the gospel, that the Holy Spirit is imparted to believers (Acts 10:36-44; 15:7-8; 2 Cor 11:4; Gal 3:1-2). In short, the gospel is the decisive place of encounter between the sinner and God the Savior.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>According to Peter’s testimony at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:7-11), an essential part of the gospel—for Gentiles and Jews alike—is salvation “through the grace of the Lord Jesus.” Toward the close of his missionary career, Paul states that his basic concern has been “to testify to the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24, <span>rsv<\/span>). This statement can be understood only in relation to Paul’s concept of the righteousness of God, particularly as set forth in Romans. Paul is here not merely expounding a divine attribute. Rather, he is dramatizing a divine activity—the manifestation of God’s righteousness now, “in the present time” (Rom 3:26), in the new age inaugurated by the coming of Jesus. The manifestation is twofold. Viewing the two aspects together, and doing so in the light of the gospel declared by Isaiah and by Jesus (both of whom strongly influenced Paul), respectively, will help us to understand why Paul speaks of “the gospel of the grace of God.”<\/p>\n<p>First, the gospel is a <em>witness<\/em> to God’s grace. In offering his Son as a sacrifice for sins (Rom 3:25a), God demonstrates his righteousness (vv 25b-26). That is, in the death of Jesus sins formerly “passed over” (v 25c) become the object of God’s wrath (cf. 1:18) and judgment. Yet in the very place where God deals justly and decisively with sins, he shows his grace to sinners. For the judgment against sin is focused not upon the sinners themselves but upon the One appointed to act on their behalf and to stand in their place (Rom 4:25; 5:6, 11; cf. 2 Cor 5:21; Gal 3:13). On this basis, sinners are freely pardoned (Rom 3:24). “The grace of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 15:11) toward the sinful is also in evidence, for he willingly bears their iniquities and suffers the consequences of their wrongdoing (Gal 2:20; cf. 2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the gospel is a <em>channel<\/em> of God’s grace. “The righteousness of God is revealed” in the gospel, says Paul (Rom 1:17). By this he means, not that the gospel talks about the righteousness of God (though it does), but that God’s righteousness is actively at work in the gospel. This activity in turn explains how the gospel becomes “the power of God for salvation” (v 16). And just how does God demonstrate his righteousness at this stage? In short, by bestowing it as a free gift on sinful human beings. It remains the righteousness of God, but by God’s grace, it is a righteousness in which humans may share. Furthermore, partaking of God’s righteousness depends on being personally united with Jesus Christ. In Paul’s view the saved person is one who has been acquitted, justified, “declared righteous” by God the judge. The basis for the verdict is not that I in myself am righteous (God justifies the ungodly, Rom 4:5). Nor does God treat me as though I were righteous. According to Paul I am declared righteous because I really <em>am<\/em> righteous—not in myself but in Christ (1 Cor 1:30; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9). This union is established through the revelation—and the free offer—of God’s righteousness in the gospel (Rom 1:16-17).<\/p>\n<h5>Responding to the Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel calls for a threefold response:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>Believing.<\/em> The gospel, says Paul, is “the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith” (Rom 1:16). For Paul, faith is the abandonment of all reliance upon “works of law” for justification (3:28) and utter dependence upon the grace of God as demonstrated in the work of Christ, especially his death (v 25). Accordingly, the “different gospel” of Galatians 1:6 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is spurious, for it preaches salvation by personal merit rather than (or together with) the work of Christ (cf. Gal 2:16). Ultimately faith rests upon God (Rom 4:24; 1 Thes 1:8-9) and upon Christ (Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 2:16, 20). Yet it is imperative that one believe the gospel also (Acts 8:12; 11:20-21; 15:7; Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-24; Phil 1:27; Heb 4:2), for it is just by this means that God’s salvation is made known and mediated. Moreover, believing the gospel entails repentance (Acts 14:15; 20:21, 24; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and obedience (Rom 1:5; 15:16-18; Heb 4:6). Those who refuse to obey the gospel are imperiling their lives (2 Thes 1:5-10; 1 Pt 4:17).<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Growing.<\/em> The Gospel is more than a message to be received—it is also a place in which to stand (1 Cor 15:1-2). It is sustainer of life as well as giver of life. One grows as a Christian not by turning from the gospel to other things (to turn away from the gospel is to abandon God and Christ, Gal 1:6), but by going ever more deeply into the gospel. In Romans 1:15 Paul expresses his eagerness to proclaim the gospel to the Christians in Rome. In the following chapters, anticipating his visit, he offers one of his most profound expositions of the gospel—one whose truth has never been fathomed and whose power has never been exhausted.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Hoping.<\/em> “The hope of the gospel” (Col 1:23) includes not only the return of Christ and the glory of heaven (Col 1:5; 3:1-4; 2 Thes 2:14-16) but the final judgment as well. For those who embrace the gospel, the last judgment holds no terrors, because the Judge is the very one who rescues them from the wrath to come (1 Thes 1:10). Those who are united to him need not dread condemnation now or at the end (Rom 8:1). Instead, the last judgment will mark their final vindication (1 Cor 4:5; Gal 5:5). Accordingly, this theme is not just a corollary but an integral part of the Good News (Rom 2:16). Those who have died since believing the gospel (1 Pt 4:6) may seem to have suffered a fate common to all people, or even the condemnation reserved for the lawless; in fact, their response to the gospel assures them of approval by the coming Lord (4:5-6; 5:4) and of a share in the imperishable inheritance of heaven (1:4).<\/p>","summary_ro":"GOSPEL Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon godspell denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.” Preview • The Gospel Message of Isaiah • The Gospel in the New Testament • The Good News of Christ’s Coming • The Gospel according to Jesus • The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection The Gospel Message of Isaiah Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his...","summary_en":"GOSPEL Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon godspell denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.” Preview • The Gospel Message of Isaiah • The Gospel in the New Testament • The Good News of Christ’s Coming • The Gospel according to Jesus • The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection The Gospel Message of Isaiah Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":16171,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Hell","title_en":"Hell","content_ro":"<h3>HELL<\/h3>\n<p>Place of future punishment for the lost, unrepentant, wicked dead.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Definition and Description<\/p>\n<p>• Biblical Terms<\/p>\n<p>• The Justice of Eternal Punishment<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DefinitionandDescription\">Definition and Description<\/p>\n<p>Hell is the final destiny of unbelievers and is variously described by the figures of a furnace of fire, eternal fire, eternal punishment (Mt 13:42, 50; 25:41, 46); outer darkness, the place of weeping and torment (8:12); the lake of fire, the second death (Rv 21:8); a place for the devil and his demons (Mt 25:41). Evidently, those in hell experience everlasting separation from the Lord, never to see the glory of his power (2 Thes 1:9). Those who worshiped the beast will be subject to continuous torment (Rv 14:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Other expressions that indicate that the final state of the wicked is eternal are these: “burn with unquenchable fire” (Mt 3:12); “to the unquenchable fire . . . where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched” (Mk 9:43, 48); there is sin that “will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come” (Mt 12:32, <span>rsv<\/span>). When Scripture is understood properly, there is no hint anywhere of the termination of the terrible state of unbelievers in hell. Their doom is unending; there is a solemn finality about their miserable condition. (It is significant that the most descriptive and conclusive utterances about hell come from the lips of Jesus.)<\/p>\n<p>A summary of all Scripture that speaks of hell indicates that there is the loss and absence of all good, and the misery and torment of an evil conscience. The most terrifying aspect is the complete and deserved separation from God and from all that is pure, holy, and beautiful. In addition, there is the awareness of being under the wrath of God and of enduring the curse of a righteous sentence because of one’s sins that were consciously and voluntarily committed.<\/p>\n<p>Although the biblical descriptions of hell are stated in very physical and literal terms, the essential character of hell should not be conceived in or limited to designations such as the worm that devours, the stripes that are inflicted, the burning or being consumed by fire. This affirmation does not detract from the horror or the gravity of the situation in hell, because nothing could possibly be worse than separation from God and the torment of an evil conscience. Hell is hell for those who are there essentially because they are completely alienated from God, and wherever there is alienation from God, there is always estrangement from one’s fellows. This is the worst possible punishment to which anyone could be subject: to be totally and irrevocably cut off from God and to be at enmity with all those who are around oneself. Another painful consequence of such a condition is to be at odds with oneself—torn apart from within by an accusing sense of guilt and shame. This condition is one of total conflict: with God, one’s neighbors, and oneself. This is hell! If the descriptions of hell are figurative or symbolic, the conditions they represent are more intense and real than the figures of speech in which they are expressed.<\/p>\n<p>Punishment for sin is a persistent teaching of the Bible. The doctrine of judgment is as extensive as the Canon itself. Typical of such passages are Genesis 2:17; 3:17-19; 4:13; Leviticus 26:27-33; Psalm 149:7; Isaiah 3:11; Ezekiel 14:10; Amos 1:2–2:16; Zechariah 14:19; Matthew 25:41, 46; Luke 16:23-24; Romans 2:5-12; Galatians 6:7-8; Hebrews 10:29-31; and Revelation 20:11-15.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BiblicalTerms\">Biblical Terms<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word “Sheol” in the OT is predominantly used for “the grave, the pit, the place of the departed dead” (Gn 37:35; Jb 7:9; 14:13; 17:13-16; Pss 6:5; 16:10; 55:15; Prv 9:18; Eccl 9:10; Is 14:11; 38:10-12, 18). There does not seem to be a very clear distinction in the OT between the final destiny of the good and the evil. They all alike go to the grave, to the world below, a world of gloom, weariness, darkness, decay, and forgetfulness, where one is remote from God (Jb 10:20-22; Ps 88:3-6), yet accessible to him (Jb 26:6; Ps 138:8; Am 9:2). It is a place characterized by silence (Pss 94:17; 115:17) and rest (Jb 3:17). Other texts, however, seem to suggest some aspect of consciousness, hope, and communication in Sheol (Jb 14:13-15; 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Is 14:9-10; Ez 32:21). A few texts seem to suggest the threat of divine judgment after death (Pss 9:17; 55:15). On the whole, Sheol was regarded with dismay and foreboding (Dt 32:22; Is 38:18).<\/p>\n<p>It was not until the time of the postcanonical Jewish literature, the writings that were developed between the close of the OT and the beginning of NT times, that clear distinctions were made between the final destinies of the righteous and the unrighteous. The idea of separate divisions within Sheol for the good and the evil was developed. It is unmistakable that there was in Jewish thought, as reflected throughout the OT, a belief in a future and continued existence beyond death, however shadowy and indefinite the concept.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word “hades” in the NT is used very similarly to “Sheol” in the OT. It was, in fact, used by the translators of the Septuagint, the Greek version of the OT, for Sheol. It designated in general the place or state of the dead, the grave, or death itself. In some versions the word is not translated at all but is transliterated simply as “hades.” The NT is not always very explicit about the meaning of hades, other than what has just been described. Use of the word often does not reveal much about the specific condition of the dead. There are some passages, however, that indicate a distinct advance over the use of Sheol in the OT. One NT passage definitely describes hades as a place of evil and punishment of the wicked, and may appropriately be translated “hell” (Lk 16:23). In all other instances, hades indicates nothing more than the place of the dead.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word “Gehenna” is used in a number of NT texts to designate the fiery place for punishment of sinners and is often translated “hell” or “the fires of hell” (Mt 5:22, 29-30; 10:28; 18:9; 23:15, 33; Mk 9:43, 45, 47; Jas 3:6). It is usually used in connection with the final judgment and often has the suggestion that the punishment spoken of is eternal. Gehenna is derived by transliteration from the Hebrew of the OT “valley of Hinnom” or the “valley of the son of Hinnom,” a ravine on the south side of Jerusalem. This valley was the center of idolatrous worship in which children were burned by fire as an offering to the heathen god Molech (2 Chr 28:3; 33:6). In the time of Josiah it became a place of abomination, polluted by dead men’s bones and rubbish (2 Kgs 23:10-14) and by the garbage and filth of Jerusalem dumped there. A fire burned continuously in this valley. It thus became a symbol of the unending fires of hell where the lost are consumed in torment. It was a symbol of judgment to be imposed on the idolatrous and disobedient (Jer 7:31-34; 32:35).<\/p>\n<p>Another Greek word used to designate hell or “the lower regions” is “Tartarus” (2 Pt 2:4), a classical word for the place of eternal punishment. The apostle Peter uses it for the fallen angels who were thrown into hell, “committed . . . to pits of nether gloom to be kept until the judgment” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>As noted above, there are, in addition to these terms, the very explicit and vivid phrases that clearly teach the doctrine of hell, as developed at the beginning of this article. The biblical doctrine is determined much more by these decisive phrases than by the somewhat indecisive but frequently used terms “Sheol” and “hades.”<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheJusticeofEternalPunishment\">The Justice of Eternal Punishment<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult for us to understand the righteous judgment of a holy God who, on one hand, hates all evil, yet, on the other hand, loves the evildoers enough to sacrifice his only Son for their salvation from sin. Divine wrath is the necessary reaction of a holy God who hates all that is contrary to his righteous nature. When the only remedy for human sin is rejected and all appeals of a loving, seeking God for the reconciliation of rebellious sinners are refused, there is no other course of action that God himself can pursue but to leave the sinner to his self-chosen destiny. Punishment for sin is then the inevitable and inescapable response of holiness to that which is morally opposite, and it must continue as long as the sinful condition requiring it continues. There is no indication anywhere in Scripture that lost sinners in hell are capable of repentance and faith. If in this life they did not turn away from sin and receive Christ as Savior with all the favorable circumstances and opportunities afforded them on earth, it is unreasonable to think they will do so in the life to come. Punishment cannot come to an end until guilt and sin come to an end. When the sinner ultimately resists and rejects the work of the Holy Spirit whereby he is convicted of sin, there remains no more possibility of repentance or salvation. He has committed an eternal sin (Mk 3:29; Rv 22:11), which deserves eternal punishment.<\/p>\n<p>The impossibility of faith and repentance in hell is seen also from the tragic reality of the depraved will, conditioned and determined by its repeated rebellion against God. Sin reproduces itself in the will, and character tends to become irrevocably fixed. God responds to endless sinning with the necessary counterpart of endless punishment.<\/p>\n<p>If the question is raised, How can a loving God send people to an everlasting hell? it must be replied that God does not choose this destination for people; they freely choose it for themselves. God simply concurs in their self-chosen way and reveals the full consequences of their evil choice. It must always be remembered that God is not only loving; he is also holy and righteous. There must be some adequate reckoning with justice in the universe where a revolt against God has brought evil consequences of enormous proportions.<\/p>\n<p>While the duration of punishment in hell is eternal for all who have chosen that destiny for themselves, there are degrees of punishment proportional to the degrees of guilt of each individual. Only God is able to determine what those degrees are, and he will assign the consequences with perfect justice according to the responsibility of each one. Evidence of such gradations in future punishment is found in Scripture (Mt 11:20-24; Lk 12:47-48; Rv 20:12-13; cf. Ez 16:48-61). An obvious comparison is made in these texts between the differing intensities of punishment that are involved in the contrasting privileges, knowledge, and opportunities.<\/p>\n<p>From all that has been said, it should be obvious that a variety of nonbiblical views must be ruled out, however attractively they may be presented by their advocates and however popular they may be from time to time. Among these views are the erroneous, but sometimes persuasive, doctrines of universalism, annihilationism, and second probation. Universalism promotes the concept that God will save everyone in the end. Annihilationism teaches that hell is not a place of conscious suffering but of final extermination. And second probation is a notion that people can be delivered from hell. It must always be remembered that the Bible is our rule of faith for the doctrine of hell, however difficult the doctrine may seem for natural reason or for human sentiment. Scripture leaves no doubt about the terrible nature and the eternal duration of hell. Rejection or neglect of this doctrine will have dire effects upon the mission of the church.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> “Abraham’s Bosom”; Dead, Place of the; Death; Gehenna; Hades; Intermediate State; Sheol; Wrath of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HELL<\/h3>\n<p>Place of future punishment for the lost, unrepentant, wicked dead.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Definition and Description<\/p>\n<p>• Biblical Terms<\/p>\n<p>• The Justice of Eternal Punishment<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DefinitionandDescription\">Definition and Description<\/p>\n<p>Hell is the final destiny of unbelievers and is variously described by the figures of a furnace of fire, eternal fire, eternal punishment (Mt 13:42, 50; 25:41, 46); outer darkness, the place of weeping and torment (8:12); the lake of fire, the second death (Rv 21:8); a place for the devil and his demons (Mt 25:41). Evidently, those in hell experience everlasting separation from the Lord, never to see the glory of his power (2 Thes 1:9). Those who worshiped the beast will be subject to continuous torment (Rv 14:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Other expressions that indicate that the final state of the wicked is eternal are these: “burn with unquenchable fire” (Mt 3:12); “to the unquenchable fire . . . where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched” (Mk 9:43, 48); there is sin that “will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come” (Mt 12:32, <span>rsv<\/span>). When Scripture is understood properly, there is no hint anywhere of the termination of the terrible state of unbelievers in hell. Their doom is unending; there is a solemn finality about their miserable condition. (It is significant that the most descriptive and conclusive utterances about hell come from the lips of Jesus.)<\/p>\n<p>A summary of all Scripture that speaks of hell indicates that there is the loss and absence of all good, and the misery and torment of an evil conscience. The most terrifying aspect is the complete and deserved separation from God and from all that is pure, holy, and beautiful. In addition, there is the awareness of being under the wrath of God and of enduring the curse of a righteous sentence because of one’s sins that were consciously and voluntarily committed.<\/p>\n<p>Although the biblical descriptions of hell are stated in very physical and literal terms, the essential character of hell should not be conceived in or limited to designations such as the worm that devours, the stripes that are inflicted, the burning or being consumed by fire. This affirmation does not detract from the horror or the gravity of the situation in hell, because nothing could possibly be worse than separation from God and the torment of an evil conscience. Hell is hell for those who are there essentially because they are completely alienated from God, and wherever there is alienation from God, there is always estrangement from one’s fellows. This is the worst possible punishment to which anyone could be subject: to be totally and irrevocably cut off from God and to be at enmity with all those who are around oneself. Another painful consequence of such a condition is to be at odds with oneself—torn apart from within by an accusing sense of guilt and shame. This condition is one of total conflict: with God, one’s neighbors, and oneself. This is hell! If the descriptions of hell are figurative or symbolic, the conditions they represent are more intense and real than the figures of speech in which they are expressed.<\/p>\n<p>Punishment for sin is a persistent teaching of the Bible. The doctrine of judgment is as extensive as the Canon itself. Typical of such passages are Genesis 2:17; 3:17-19; 4:13; Leviticus 26:27-33; Psalm 149:7; Isaiah 3:11; Ezekiel 14:10; Amos 1:2–2:16; Zechariah 14:19; Matthew 25:41, 46; Luke 16:23-24; Romans 2:5-12; Galatians 6:7-8; Hebrews 10:29-31; and Revelation 20:11-15.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BiblicalTerms\">Biblical Terms<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word “Sheol” in the OT is predominantly used for “the grave, the pit, the place of the departed dead” (Gn 37:35; Jb 7:9; 14:13; 17:13-16; Pss 6:5; 16:10; 55:15; Prv 9:18; Eccl 9:10; Is 14:11; 38:10-12, 18). There does not seem to be a very clear distinction in the OT between the final destiny of the good and the evil. They all alike go to the grave, to the world below, a world of gloom, weariness, darkness, decay, and forgetfulness, where one is remote from God (Jb 10:20-22; Ps 88:3-6), yet accessible to him (Jb 26:6; Ps 138:8; Am 9:2). It is a place characterized by silence (Pss 94:17; 115:17) and rest (Jb 3:17). Other texts, however, seem to suggest some aspect of consciousness, hope, and communication in Sheol (Jb 14:13-15; 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Is 14:9-10; Ez 32:21). A few texts seem to suggest the threat of divine judgment after death (Pss 9:17; 55:15). On the whole, Sheol was regarded with dismay and foreboding (Dt 32:22; Is 38:18).<\/p>\n<p>It was not until the time of the postcanonical Jewish literature, the writings that were developed between the close of the OT and the beginning of NT times, that clear distinctions were made between the final destinies of the righteous and the unrighteous. The idea of separate divisions within Sheol for the good and the evil was developed. It is unmistakable that there was in Jewish thought, as reflected throughout the OT, a belief in a future and continued existence beyond death, however shadowy and indefinite the concept.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word “hades” in the NT is used very similarly to “Sheol” in the OT. It was, in fact, used by the translators of the Septuagint, the Greek version of the OT, for Sheol. It designated in general the place or state of the dead, the grave, or death itself. In some versions the word is not translated at all but is transliterated simply as “hades.” The NT is not always very explicit about the meaning of hades, other than what has just been described. Use of the word often does not reveal much about the specific condition of the dead. There are some passages, however, that indicate a distinct advance over the use of Sheol in the OT. One NT passage definitely describes hades as a place of evil and punishment of the wicked, and may appropriately be translated “hell” (Lk 16:23). In all other instances, hades indicates nothing more than the place of the dead.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word “Gehenna” is used in a number of NT texts to designate the fiery place for punishment of sinners and is often translated “hell” or “the fires of hell” (Mt 5:22, 29-30; 10:28; 18:9; 23:15, 33; Mk 9:43, 45, 47; Jas 3:6). It is usually used in connection with the final judgment and often has the suggestion that the punishment spoken of is eternal. Gehenna is derived by transliteration from the Hebrew of the OT “valley of Hinnom” or the “valley of the son of Hinnom,” a ravine on the south side of Jerusalem. This valley was the center of idolatrous worship in which children were burned by fire as an offering to the heathen god Molech (2 Chr 28:3; 33:6). In the time of Josiah it became a place of abomination, polluted by dead men’s bones and rubbish (2 Kgs 23:10-14) and by the garbage and filth of Jerusalem dumped there. A fire burned continuously in this valley. It thus became a symbol of the unending fires of hell where the lost are consumed in torment. It was a symbol of judgment to be imposed on the idolatrous and disobedient (Jer 7:31-34; 32:35).<\/p>\n<p>Another Greek word used to designate hell or “the lower regions” is “Tartarus” (2 Pt 2:4), a classical word for the place of eternal punishment. The apostle Peter uses it for the fallen angels who were thrown into hell, “committed . . . to pits of nether gloom to be kept until the judgment” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>As noted above, there are, in addition to these terms, the very explicit and vivid phrases that clearly teach the doctrine of hell, as developed at the beginning of this article. The biblical doctrine is determined much more by these decisive phrases than by the somewhat indecisive but frequently used terms “Sheol” and “hades.”<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheJusticeofEternalPunishment\">The Justice of Eternal Punishment<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult for us to understand the righteous judgment of a holy God who, on one hand, hates all evil, yet, on the other hand, loves the evildoers enough to sacrifice his only Son for their salvation from sin. Divine wrath is the necessary reaction of a holy God who hates all that is contrary to his righteous nature. When the only remedy for human sin is rejected and all appeals of a loving, seeking God for the reconciliation of rebellious sinners are refused, there is no other course of action that God himself can pursue but to leave the sinner to his self-chosen destiny. Punishment for sin is then the inevitable and inescapable response of holiness to that which is morally opposite, and it must continue as long as the sinful condition requiring it continues. There is no indication anywhere in Scripture that lost sinners in hell are capable of repentance and faith. If in this life they did not turn away from sin and receive Christ as Savior with all the favorable circumstances and opportunities afforded them on earth, it is unreasonable to think they will do so in the life to come. Punishment cannot come to an end until guilt and sin come to an end. When the sinner ultimately resists and rejects the work of the Holy Spirit whereby he is convicted of sin, there remains no more possibility of repentance or salvation. He has committed an eternal sin (Mk 3:29; Rv 22:11), which deserves eternal punishment.<\/p>\n<p>The impossibility of faith and repentance in hell is seen also from the tragic reality of the depraved will, conditioned and determined by its repeated rebellion against God. Sin reproduces itself in the will, and character tends to become irrevocably fixed. God responds to endless sinning with the necessary counterpart of endless punishment.<\/p>\n<p>If the question is raised, How can a loving God send people to an everlasting hell? it must be replied that God does not choose this destination for people; they freely choose it for themselves. God simply concurs in their self-chosen way and reveals the full consequences of their evil choice. It must always be remembered that God is not only loving; he is also holy and righteous. There must be some adequate reckoning with justice in the universe where a revolt against God has brought evil consequences of enormous proportions.<\/p>\n<p>While the duration of punishment in hell is eternal for all who have chosen that destiny for themselves, there are degrees of punishment proportional to the degrees of guilt of each individual. Only God is able to determine what those degrees are, and he will assign the consequences with perfect justice according to the responsibility of each one. Evidence of such gradations in future punishment is found in Scripture (Mt 11:20-24; Lk 12:47-48; Rv 20:12-13; cf. Ez 16:48-61). An obvious comparison is made in these texts between the differing intensities of punishment that are involved in the contrasting privileges, knowledge, and opportunities.<\/p>\n<p>From all that has been said, it should be obvious that a variety of nonbiblical views must be ruled out, however attractively they may be presented by their advocates and however popular they may be from time to time. Among these views are the erroneous, but sometimes persuasive, doctrines of universalism, annihilationism, and second probation. Universalism promotes the concept that God will save everyone in the end. Annihilationism teaches that hell is not a place of conscious suffering but of final extermination. And second probation is a notion that people can be delivered from hell. It must always be remembered that the Bible is our rule of faith for the doctrine of hell, however difficult the doctrine may seem for natural reason or for human sentiment. Scripture leaves no doubt about the terrible nature and the eternal duration of hell. Rejection or neglect of this doctrine will have dire effects upon the mission of the church.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> “Abraham’s Bosom”; Dead, Place of the; Death; Gehenna; Hades; Intermediate State; Sheol; Wrath of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HELL Place of future punishment for the lost, unrepentant, wicked dead. Preview • Definition and Description • Biblical Terms • The Justice of Eternal Punishment Definition and Description Hell is the final destiny of unbelievers and is variously described by the figures of a furnace of fire, eternal fire, eternal punishment (Mt 13:42, 50; 25:41, 46); outer darkness, the place of weeping and torment (8:12); the lake of fire, the second death (Rv 21:8); a place for the devil and his demons (Mt...","summary_en":"HELL Place of future punishment for the lost, unrepentant, wicked dead. Preview • Definition and Description • Biblical Terms • The Justice of Eternal Punishment Definition and Description Hell is the final destiny of unbelievers and is variously described by the figures of a furnace of fire, eternal fire, eternal punishment (Mt 13:42, 50; 25:41, 46); outer darkness, the place of weeping and torment (8:12); the lake of fire, the second death (Rv 21:8); a place for the devil and his demons (Mt...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22342,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Korazin","title_en":"Korazin","content_ro":"<h3>KORAZIN<\/h3>\n<p>Palestinian city on which Jesus pronounced woe (Mt 11:21-24; Lk 10:13-14). It was in Korazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum that “most of his miracles” had been done, but the people were generally unresponsive and had not repented (Mt 11:20).<\/p>\n<p>From the biblical references, Korazin was probably in the vicinity of Capernaum and Bethsaida. The church father Jerome (c. <span>AD<\/span> 400) located it two miles (3.2 kilometers) from Capernaum, which is on the northwest shore of the Sea of Galilee. Scholars generally agree that the ruins of Khirbet Kerazeh on the basalt hills north of Capernaum are those of Korazin. The ruins indicate that it was a fairly important city. Remains of a synagogue, probably from the fourth century <span>AD<\/span>, include a carved seat with an inscription, an example of a “Moses’ seat” (Mt 23:2). According to the Jewish Talmud, Korazin was known for its wheat.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KORAZIN<\/h3>\n<p>Palestinian city on which Jesus pronounced woe (Mt 11:21-24; Lk 10:13-14). It was in Korazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum that “most of his miracles” had been done, but the people were generally unresponsive and had not repented (Mt 11:20).<\/p>\n<p>From the biblical references, Korazin was probably in the vicinity of Capernaum and Bethsaida. The church father Jerome (c. <span>AD<\/span> 400) located it two miles (3.2 kilometers) from Capernaum, which is on the northwest shore of the Sea of Galilee. Scholars generally agree that the ruins of Khirbet Kerazeh on the basalt hills north of Capernaum are those of Korazin. The ruins indicate that it was a fairly important city. Remains of a synagogue, probably from the fourth century <span>AD<\/span>, include a carved seat with an inscription, an example of a “Moses’ seat” (Mt 23:2). According to the Jewish Talmud, Korazin was known for its wheat.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KORAZIN Palestinian city on which Jesus pronounced woe (Mt 11:21-24; Lk 10:13-14). It was in Korazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum that “most of his miracles” had been done, but the people were generally unresponsive and had not repented (Mt 11:20). From the biblical references, Korazin was probably in the vicinity of Capernaum and Bethsaida. The church father Jerome (c. AD 400) located it two miles (3.2 kilometers) from Capernaum, which is on the northwest shore of the Sea of Galilee. Scholars g...","summary_en":"KORAZIN Palestinian city on which Jesus pronounced woe (Mt 11:21-24; Lk 10:13-14). It was in Korazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum that “most of his miracles” had been done, but the people were generally unresponsive and had not repented (Mt 11:20). From the biblical references, Korazin was probably in the vicinity of Capernaum and Bethsaida. The church father Jerome (c. AD 400) located it two miles (3.2 kilometers) from Capernaum, which is on the northwest shore of the Sea of Galilee. Scholars g...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24694,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of Matthew","title_en":"Gospel of Matthew","content_ro":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","summary_en":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31026,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Power","title_en":"Power","content_ro":"<h3>POWER<\/h3>\n<p>Ability to do things, by virtue of strength, skill, resources, or authorization. In the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT, there are several different words used for power. What the Bible says about power may be subsumed under four headings: (1) the unlimited power of God; (2) the limited power God gives to his creatures; (3) the power of God seen in Jesus Christ; and (4) the power of God (by the Holy Spirit) in the lives of his people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUnlimitedPowerofGod\">The Unlimited Power of God<\/p>\n<p>God is almighty and all other power is derived from him and subject to him. Much that the Bible says is summed up in the words of 1 Chronicles 29:11-12 addressed to God in praise: “Thine, O <span>Lord<\/span>, is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty; for all that is in the heavens and in the earth is thine; thine is the kingdom, O <span>Lord<\/span>. . . . thou rulest over all. In thy hand are power and might; and in thy hand it is to make great and to give strength to all” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Using human terms, the OT often speaks of God’s “mighty hand” and his “outstretched arm,” both being used for the power of God in action (Ex 6:6; 7:4; Ps 44:2-3). His power is seen in creation (Ps 65:6; Is 40:26; Jer 10:12; 27:5), in his rule over the world (2 Chr 20:6), in his acts of salvation and judgment (Ex 15:6; Dt 26:8), and in all that he does for his people (Ps 111:6). The NT, as well as the OT, speaks of the mighty power of God. Ephesians 1:19 speaks of the immeasurable greatness of his power, and the words of Jesus in Matthew 26:64 show that the word could be substituted for the very name of God when he said that the Son of Man would be seen “seated at the right hand of Power.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLimitedPowerGodGivestoHisCreatures\">The Limited Power God Gives to His Creatures<\/p>\n<p>Animals have power, as is particularly evident in the wild ox, the horse, and the lion (Jb 39:11, 19; Prv 30:30). There is power in wind and storm, thunder and lightning. Power is given to humans: physical strength (Jgs 16:5-6), power to fight (6:12), and the power to do good and the power to do harm (Gn 31:29; Prv 3:27; Mi 2:1). Rulers have God-given power and authority (Rom 13:1). The Bible also speaks of the power of angels (2 Pt 2:11) and of spiritual beings known as “principalities and powers.” Certain powers are given to Satan (see Jb 1:6-12; 2:1-6). Sin, evil, and death are allowed to have some power over men (Hos 13:14; Lk 22:53; Rom 3:9). All of these, however, have only limited power, and God is able to give his people strength to conquer all these powers. He can save them from the power of animals (Dn 6:27; Lk 10:19) and from the power of other people over them. To Pilate Jesus said, “You would have no power over me at all unless it were given to you from above” (Jn 19:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). He is able to deliver people from the power of sin and death, from Satan, and from all the spiritual forces of evil (2 Cor 10:4; Eph 6:10-18). The “ruler of this world” could ultimately have no power over Christ (Jn 14:30) and so cannot have power over those who rely on him.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePowerofGodSeeninJesusChrist\">The Power of God Seen in Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels and the book of Acts bear frequent witness to the power of Christ. Power was shown in his miracles (Mt 11:20; Acts 2:22), in his works of healing and exorcism (Lk 4:36; 5:17; 6:19; Acts 10:38). Power is shown supremely in his resurrection. Jesus speaks of his power to give up his life and power to take it again (Jn 10:18), but the NT speaks most frequently of the power of God the Father shown in the raising of his Son from the dead (Rom 1:4; Eph 1:19-20). In the end he will be seen coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory (Mt 24:30). With regard to his human life on earth, however, it may be noted in the light of what follows that he lived and did his mighty works in the power of the Holy Spirit (Lk 4:14; Acts 10:38).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePowerofGodintheLivesofHisPeople\">The Power of God in the Lives of His People<\/p>\n<p>In the OT it is often said that the weak are made strong by the power of God. He empowers those who are weak (Is 40:29) so that they may increase from strength to strength (Ps 84:7; see also Pss 68:35; 138:3). We read in particular of his power being given to prophets (Mi 3:8) and kings (1 Sm 2:10; Ps 21:1), and it is said that in an outstanding way power will be given to the Messiah (Is 9:6; 11:2; Mi 5:4). But to all God’s people power is offered that they may live for him and serve him (Is 49:5). When we turn to the NT, we read of the gospel itself as being the power of God for salvation—to everyone who has faith (Rom 1:16). “To all who received him [Jesus Christ], who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God” (Jn 1:12, <span>rsv<\/span>). In that life as children of God, power is received from the Holy Spirit (Acts 6:8), inner strength to live in his service (Eph 3:16), power to be his witnesses (Lk 24:49; Acts 1:8), power to endure suffering (2 Tm 1:8), power for ministry (Eph 3:7), power in the face of weakness (2 Cor 12:9), power through prayer (Jas 5:16), and power to be kept from evil (1 Pt 1:5). Those who do great things in the service of Christ do not do them in their own strength (Acts 3:12); he sent out his disciples confident only in the assurance that all things are under his authority and that they would have the power of his unfailing presence with them (Mt 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Principalities and Powers.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>POWER<\/h3>\n<p>Ability to do things, by virtue of strength, skill, resources, or authorization. In the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT, there are several different words used for power. What the Bible says about power may be subsumed under four headings: (1) the unlimited power of God; (2) the limited power God gives to his creatures; (3) the power of God seen in Jesus Christ; and (4) the power of God (by the Holy Spirit) in the lives of his people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheUnlimitedPowerofGod\">The Unlimited Power of God<\/p>\n<p>God is almighty and all other power is derived from him and subject to him. Much that the Bible says is summed up in the words of 1 Chronicles 29:11-12 addressed to God in praise: “Thine, O <span>Lord<\/span>, is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty; for all that is in the heavens and in the earth is thine; thine is the kingdom, O <span>Lord<\/span>. . . . thou rulest over all. In thy hand are power and might; and in thy hand it is to make great and to give strength to all” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Using human terms, the OT often speaks of God’s “mighty hand” and his “outstretched arm,” both being used for the power of God in action (Ex 6:6; 7:4; Ps 44:2-3). His power is seen in creation (Ps 65:6; Is 40:26; Jer 10:12; 27:5), in his rule over the world (2 Chr 20:6), in his acts of salvation and judgment (Ex 15:6; Dt 26:8), and in all that he does for his people (Ps 111:6). The NT, as well as the OT, speaks of the mighty power of God. Ephesians 1:19 speaks of the immeasurable greatness of his power, and the words of Jesus in Matthew 26:64 show that the word could be substituted for the very name of God when he said that the Son of Man would be seen “seated at the right hand of Power.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLimitedPowerGodGivestoHisCreatures\">The Limited Power God Gives to His Creatures<\/p>\n<p>Animals have power, as is particularly evident in the wild ox, the horse, and the lion (Jb 39:11, 19; Prv 30:30). There is power in wind and storm, thunder and lightning. Power is given to humans: physical strength (Jgs 16:5-6), power to fight (6:12), and the power to do good and the power to do harm (Gn 31:29; Prv 3:27; Mi 2:1). Rulers have God-given power and authority (Rom 13:1). The Bible also speaks of the power of angels (2 Pt 2:11) and of spiritual beings known as “principalities and powers.” Certain powers are given to Satan (see Jb 1:6-12; 2:1-6). Sin, evil, and death are allowed to have some power over men (Hos 13:14; Lk 22:53; Rom 3:9). All of these, however, have only limited power, and God is able to give his people strength to conquer all these powers. He can save them from the power of animals (Dn 6:27; Lk 10:19) and from the power of other people over them. To Pilate Jesus said, “You would have no power over me at all unless it were given to you from above” (Jn 19:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). He is able to deliver people from the power of sin and death, from Satan, and from all the spiritual forces of evil (2 Cor 10:4; Eph 6:10-18). The “ruler of this world” could ultimately have no power over Christ (Jn 14:30) and so cannot have power over those who rely on him.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePowerofGodSeeninJesusChrist\">The Power of God Seen in Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels and the book of Acts bear frequent witness to the power of Christ. Power was shown in his miracles (Mt 11:20; Acts 2:22), in his works of healing and exorcism (Lk 4:36; 5:17; 6:19; Acts 10:38). Power is shown supremely in his resurrection. Jesus speaks of his power to give up his life and power to take it again (Jn 10:18), but the NT speaks most frequently of the power of God the Father shown in the raising of his Son from the dead (Rom 1:4; Eph 1:19-20). In the end he will be seen coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory (Mt 24:30). With regard to his human life on earth, however, it may be noted in the light of what follows that he lived and did his mighty works in the power of the Holy Spirit (Lk 4:14; Acts 10:38).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePowerofGodintheLivesofHisPeople\">The Power of God in the Lives of His People<\/p>\n<p>In the OT it is often said that the weak are made strong by the power of God. He empowers those who are weak (Is 40:29) so that they may increase from strength to strength (Ps 84:7; see also Pss 68:35; 138:3). We read in particular of his power being given to prophets (Mi 3:8) and kings (1 Sm 2:10; Ps 21:1), and it is said that in an outstanding way power will be given to the Messiah (Is 9:6; 11:2; Mi 5:4). But to all God’s people power is offered that they may live for him and serve him (Is 49:5). When we turn to the NT, we read of the gospel itself as being the power of God for salvation—to everyone who has faith (Rom 1:16). “To all who received him [Jesus Christ], who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God” (Jn 1:12, <span>rsv<\/span>). In that life as children of God, power is received from the Holy Spirit (Acts 6:8), inner strength to live in his service (Eph 3:16), power to be his witnesses (Lk 24:49; Acts 1:8), power to endure suffering (2 Tm 1:8), power for ministry (Eph 3:7), power in the face of weakness (2 Cor 12:9), power through prayer (Jas 5:16), and power to be kept from evil (1 Pt 1:5). Those who do great things in the service of Christ do not do them in their own strength (Acts 3:12); he sent out his disciples confident only in the assurance that all things are under his authority and that they would have the power of his unfailing presence with them (Mt 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Principalities and Powers.<\/p>","summary_ro":"POWER Ability to do things, by virtue of strength, skill, resources, or authorization. In the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT, there are several different words used for power. What the Bible says about power may be subsumed under four headings: (1) the unlimited power of God; (2) the limited power God gives to his creatures; (3) the power of God seen in Jesus Christ; and (4) the power of God (by the Holy Spirit) in the lives of his people. The Unlimited Power of God God is almighty ...","summary_en":"POWER Ability to do things, by virtue of strength, skill, resources, or authorization. In the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT, there are several different words used for power. What the Bible says about power may be subsumed under four headings: (1) the unlimited power of God; (2) the limited power God gives to his creatures; (3) the power of God seen in Jesus Christ; and (4) the power of God (by the Holy Spirit) in the lives of his people. The Unlimited Power of God God is almighty ...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54703,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:20","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:20-24<\/strong> The <em>miracles<\/em> Jesus performed confirmed him as Messiah (11:5-6) and demanded repentance (11:20). Rejecting the Messiah would result in terrible judgment because the evidence of Jesus’ identity was clear.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:20-24<\/strong> The <em>miracles<\/em> Jesus performed confirmed him as Messiah (11:5-6) and demanded repentance (11:20). Rejecting the Messiah would result in terrible judgment because the evidence of Jesus’ identity was clear.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:20-24 The miracles Jesus performed confirmed him as Messiah (11:5-6) and demanded repentance (11:20). Rejecting the Messiah would result in terrible judgment because the evidence of Jesus’ identity was clear.","summary_en":"11:20-24 The miracles Jesus performed confirmed him as Messiah (11:5-6) and demanded repentance (11:20). Rejecting the Messiah would result in terrible judgment because the evidence of Jesus’ identity was clear.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82329,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:20","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:20-24<\/strong> The <em>miracles<\/em> Jesus performed confirmed him as Messiah (11:5-6) and demanded repentance (11:20). Rejecting the Messiah would result in terrible judgment because the evidence of Jesus’ identity was clear.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:20-24<\/strong> The <em>miracles<\/em> Jesus performed confirmed him as Messiah (11:5-6) and demanded repentance (11:20). Rejecting the Messiah would result in terrible judgment because the evidence of Jesus’ identity was clear.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:20-24 The miracles Jesus performed confirmed him as Messiah (11:5-6) and demanded repentance (11:20). Rejecting the Messiah would result in terrible judgment because the evidence of Jesus’ identity was clear.","summary_en":"11:20-24 The miracles Jesus performed confirmed him as Messiah (11:5-6) and demanded repentance (11:20). Rejecting the Messiah would result in terrible judgment because the evidence of Jesus’ identity was clear.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":109955,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:20","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:20-24<\/strong> The <em>miracles<\/em> Jesus performed confirmed him as Messiah (11:5-6) and demanded repentance (11:20). Rejecting the Messiah would result in terrible judgment because the evidence of Jesus’ identity was clear.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:20-24<\/strong> The <em>miracles<\/em> Jesus performed confirmed him as Messiah (11:5-6) and demanded repentance (11:20). Rejecting the Messiah would result in terrible judgment because the evidence of Jesus’ identity was clear.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:20-24 The miracles Jesus performed confirmed him as Messiah (11:5-6) and demanded repentance (11:20). Rejecting the Messiah would result in terrible judgment because the evidence of Jesus’ identity was clear.","summary_en":"11:20-24 The miracles Jesus performed confirmed him as Messiah (11:5-6) and demanded repentance (11:20). Rejecting the Messiah would result in terrible judgment because the evidence of Jesus’ identity was clear.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137581,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:20","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:20-24<\/strong> The <em>miracles<\/em> Jesus performed confirmed him as Messiah (11:5-6) and demanded repentance (11:20). Rejecting the Messiah would result in terrible judgment because the evidence of Jesus’ identity was clear.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:20-24<\/strong> The <em>miracles<\/em> Jesus performed confirmed him as Messiah (11:5-6) and demanded repentance (11:20). Rejecting the Messiah would result in terrible judgment because the evidence of Jesus’ identity was clear.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:20-24 The miracles Jesus performed confirmed him as Messiah (11:5-6) and demanded repentance (11:20). Rejecting the Messiah would result in terrible judgment because the evidence of Jesus’ identity was clear.","summary_en":"11:20-24 The miracles Jesus performed confirmed him as Messiah (11:5-6) and demanded repentance (11:20). Rejecting the Messiah would result in terrible judgment because the evidence of Jesus’ identity was clear.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65198,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Faith and Good Deeds","title_en":"Faith and Good Deeds","content_ro":"<h3>Faith and Good Deeds<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consistent feature of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Matt 7:13-27; 13:3-9, 18-23; 16:27). For Jesus, works are a sure indicator of faith, which begins with repentance—a conversion of the heart and mind that involves turning away from sin to God (Matt 4:17; see also 3:2, 8-10; 11:20-24; 12:38-42).<\/p>\n<p>A misapplication of the concept of salvation by grace alone has led to a false dichotomy between faith and works. Salvation is not achieved by works, but neither is it without works (see Gal 5:6, 21; Eph 2:10; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:8). Jesus promises blessing and reward to those who live in accord with God’s will (Matt 5:3-12). Consequently, righteousness is required of those who want to enter the Kingdom (5:20-48; 7:21; 22:11-14; 23:3). Faith that does not result in works is not saving faith (Jas 2:14-26).<\/p>\n<p>James, in his conspicuous emphasis on faithfulness to God, argues for charitable deeds as an expression of faith (2:14-26). A faith relationship with God cannot be based merely on believing a true statement (2:19). Saving faith results in actions (1:22-25; 2:14). Faithful actions emulate God, who generously gives good gifts (1:5, 17; 4:6). Faith and good deeds are therefore inseparable. As with Abraham, good deeds show that a person has complete faith and is righteous before God (2:23; see Gen 15:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught and modeled faith that does good deeds (see Matt 5:13-16), and Paul also affirmed the need for good deeds (Rom 2:6; Gal 6:5-10; Eph 2:10; Phil 2:12-13; 1 Thes 1:3). James points to some specific actions which demonstrate faith, including caring for orphans and widows (1:27), avoiding favoritism toward the rich (2:1-7), providing food and clothing for the poor (2:15-17), controlling one’s tongue (3:1-12), promoting peace (3:17-18), and refraining from judging others (4:11-12). All of these things can be understood as “faith expressing itself in love” (Gal 5:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:1; 22:1-19; Lev 22:31; Hab 2:4; Matt 3:2, 8-10; 4:17; 5:3-12, 20-48; 7:13-27; 10:32-33; 11:20-24; 12:33-42; 13:3-9, 18-23; 15:15-20; 16:27; 25:31-46; John 15:2; Rom 2:6; Gal 5:6, 16-26; 6:5-10; Eph 2:8-10; 5:3-9; Phil 2:12-13; Heb 11:1-40; Jas 2:14-26; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:6-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Faith and Good Deeds<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consistent feature of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Matt 7:13-27; 13:3-9, 18-23; 16:27). For Jesus, works are a sure indicator of faith, which begins with repentance—a conversion of the heart and mind that involves turning away from sin to God (Matt 4:17; see also 3:2, 8-10; 11:20-24; 12:38-42).<\/p>\n<p>A misapplication of the concept of salvation by grace alone has led to a false dichotomy between faith and works. Salvation is not achieved by works, but neither is it without works (see Gal 5:6, 21; Eph 2:10; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:8). Jesus promises blessing and reward to those who live in accord with God’s will (Matt 5:3-12). Consequently, righteousness is required of those who want to enter the Kingdom (5:20-48; 7:21; 22:11-14; 23:3). Faith that does not result in works is not saving faith (Jas 2:14-26).<\/p>\n<p>James, in his conspicuous emphasis on faithfulness to God, argues for charitable deeds as an expression of faith (2:14-26). A faith relationship with God cannot be based merely on believing a true statement (2:19). Saving faith results in actions (1:22-25; 2:14). Faithful actions emulate God, who generously gives good gifts (1:5, 17; 4:6). Faith and good deeds are therefore inseparable. As with Abraham, good deeds show that a person has complete faith and is righteous before God (2:23; see Gen 15:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught and modeled faith that does good deeds (see Matt 5:13-16), and Paul also affirmed the need for good deeds (Rom 2:6; Gal 6:5-10; Eph 2:10; Phil 2:12-13; 1 Thes 1:3). James points to some specific actions which demonstrate faith, including caring for orphans and widows (1:27), avoiding favoritism toward the rich (2:1-7), providing food and clothing for the poor (2:15-17), controlling one’s tongue (3:1-12), promoting peace (3:17-18), and refraining from judging others (4:11-12). All of these things can be understood as “faith expressing itself in love” (Gal 5:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:1; 22:1-19; Lev 22:31; Hab 2:4; Matt 3:2, 8-10; 4:17; 5:3-12, 20-48; 7:13-27; 10:32-33; 11:20-24; 12:33-42; 13:3-9, 18-23; 15:15-20; 16:27; 25:31-46; John 15:2; Rom 2:6; Gal 5:6, 16-26; 6:5-10; Eph 2:8-10; 5:3-9; Phil 2:12-13; Heb 11:1-40; Jas 2:14-26; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:6-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Faith and Good Deeds Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20). The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consiste...","summary_en":"Faith and Good Deeds Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20). The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consiste...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92824,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Faith and Good Deeds","title_en":"Faith and Good Deeds","content_ro":"<h3>Faith and Good Deeds<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consistent feature of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Matt 7:13-27; 13:3-9, 18-23; 16:27). For Jesus, works are a sure indicator of faith, which begins with repentance—a conversion of the heart and mind that involves turning away from sin to God (Matt 4:17; see also 3:2, 8-10; 11:20-24; 12:38-42).<\/p>\n<p>A misapplication of the concept of salvation by grace alone has led to a false dichotomy between faith and works. Salvation is not achieved by works, but neither is it without works (see Gal 5:6, 21; Eph 2:10; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:8). Jesus promises blessing and reward to those who live in accord with God’s will (Matt 5:3-12). Consequently, righteousness is required of those who want to enter the Kingdom (5:20-48; 7:21; 22:11-14; 23:3). Faith that does not result in works is not saving faith (Jas 2:14-26).<\/p>\n<p>James, in his conspicuous emphasis on faithfulness to God, argues for charitable deeds as an expression of faith (2:14-26). A faith relationship with God cannot be based merely on believing a true statement (2:19). Saving faith results in actions (1:22-25; 2:14). Faithful actions emulate God, who generously gives good gifts (1:5, 17; 4:6). Faith and good deeds are therefore inseparable. As with Abraham, good deeds show that a person has complete faith and is righteous before God (2:23; see Gen 15:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught and modeled faith that does good deeds (see Matt 5:13-16), and Paul also affirmed the need for good deeds (Rom 2:6; Gal 6:5-10; Eph 2:10; Phil 2:12-13; 1 Thes 1:3). James points to some specific actions which demonstrate faith, including caring for orphans and widows (1:27), avoiding favoritism toward the rich (2:1-7), providing food and clothing for the poor (2:15-17), controlling one’s tongue (3:1-12), promoting peace (3:17-18), and refraining from judging others (4:11-12). All of these things can be understood as “faith expressing itself in love” (Gal 5:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:1; 22:1-19; Lev 22:31; Hab 2:4; Matt 3:2, 8-10; 4:17; 5:3-12, 20-48; 7:13-27; 10:32-33; 11:20-24; 12:33-42; 13:3-9, 18-23; 15:15-20; 16:27; 25:31-46; John 15:2; Rom 2:6; Gal 5:6, 16-26; 6:5-10; Eph 2:8-10; 5:3-9; Phil 2:12-13; Heb 11:1-40; Jas 2:14-26; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:6-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Faith and Good Deeds<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consistent feature of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Matt 7:13-27; 13:3-9, 18-23; 16:27). For Jesus, works are a sure indicator of faith, which begins with repentance—a conversion of the heart and mind that involves turning away from sin to God (Matt 4:17; see also 3:2, 8-10; 11:20-24; 12:38-42).<\/p>\n<p>A misapplication of the concept of salvation by grace alone has led to a false dichotomy between faith and works. Salvation is not achieved by works, but neither is it without works (see Gal 5:6, 21; Eph 2:10; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:8). Jesus promises blessing and reward to those who live in accord with God’s will (Matt 5:3-12). Consequently, righteousness is required of those who want to enter the Kingdom (5:20-48; 7:21; 22:11-14; 23:3). Faith that does not result in works is not saving faith (Jas 2:14-26).<\/p>\n<p>James, in his conspicuous emphasis on faithfulness to God, argues for charitable deeds as an expression of faith (2:14-26). A faith relationship with God cannot be based merely on believing a true statement (2:19). Saving faith results in actions (1:22-25; 2:14). Faithful actions emulate God, who generously gives good gifts (1:5, 17; 4:6). Faith and good deeds are therefore inseparable. As with Abraham, good deeds show that a person has complete faith and is righteous before God (2:23; see Gen 15:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught and modeled faith that does good deeds (see Matt 5:13-16), and Paul also affirmed the need for good deeds (Rom 2:6; Gal 6:5-10; Eph 2:10; Phil 2:12-13; 1 Thes 1:3). James points to some specific actions which demonstrate faith, including caring for orphans and widows (1:27), avoiding favoritism toward the rich (2:1-7), providing food and clothing for the poor (2:15-17), controlling one’s tongue (3:1-12), promoting peace (3:17-18), and refraining from judging others (4:11-12). All of these things can be understood as “faith expressing itself in love” (Gal 5:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:1; 22:1-19; Lev 22:31; Hab 2:4; Matt 3:2, 8-10; 4:17; 5:3-12, 20-48; 7:13-27; 10:32-33; 11:20-24; 12:33-42; 13:3-9, 18-23; 15:15-20; 16:27; 25:31-46; John 15:2; Rom 2:6; Gal 5:6, 16-26; 6:5-10; Eph 2:8-10; 5:3-9; Phil 2:12-13; Heb 11:1-40; Jas 2:14-26; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:6-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Faith and Good Deeds Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20). The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consiste...","summary_en":"Faith and Good Deeds Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20). The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consiste...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120450,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Faith and Good Deeds","title_en":"Faith and Good Deeds","content_ro":"<h3>Faith and Good Deeds<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consistent feature of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Matt 7:13-27; 13:3-9, 18-23; 16:27). For Jesus, works are a sure indicator of faith, which begins with repentance—a conversion of the heart and mind that involves turning away from sin to God (Matt 4:17; see also 3:2, 8-10; 11:20-24; 12:38-42).<\/p>\n<p>A misapplication of the concept of salvation by grace alone has led to a false dichotomy between faith and works. Salvation is not achieved by works, but neither is it without works (see Gal 5:6, 21; Eph 2:10; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:8). Jesus promises blessing and reward to those who live in accord with God’s will (Matt 5:3-12). Consequently, righteousness is required of those who want to enter the Kingdom (5:20-48; 7:21; 22:11-14; 23:3). Faith that does not result in works is not saving faith (Jas 2:14-26).<\/p>\n<p>James, in his conspicuous emphasis on faithfulness to God, argues for charitable deeds as an expression of faith (2:14-26). A faith relationship with God cannot be based merely on believing a true statement (2:19). Saving faith results in actions (1:22-25; 2:14). Faithful actions emulate God, who generously gives good gifts (1:5, 17; 4:6). Faith and good deeds are therefore inseparable. As with Abraham, good deeds show that a person has complete faith and is righteous before God (2:23; see Gen 15:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught and modeled faith that does good deeds (see Matt 5:13-16), and Paul also affirmed the need for good deeds (Rom 2:6; Gal 6:5-10; Eph 2:10; Phil 2:12-13; 1 Thes 1:3). James points to some specific actions which demonstrate faith, including caring for orphans and widows (1:27), avoiding favoritism toward the rich (2:1-7), providing food and clothing for the poor (2:15-17), controlling one’s tongue (3:1-12), promoting peace (3:17-18), and refraining from judging others (4:11-12). All of these things can be understood as “faith expressing itself in love” (Gal 5:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:1; 22:1-19; Lev 22:31; Hab 2:4; Matt 3:2, 8-10; 4:17; 5:3-12, 20-48; 7:13-27; 10:32-33; 11:20-24; 12:33-42; 13:3-9, 18-23; 15:15-20; 16:27; 25:31-46; John 15:2; Rom 2:6; Gal 5:6, 16-26; 6:5-10; Eph 2:8-10; 5:3-9; Phil 2:12-13; Heb 11:1-40; Jas 2:14-26; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:6-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Faith and Good Deeds<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consistent feature of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Matt 7:13-27; 13:3-9, 18-23; 16:27). For Jesus, works are a sure indicator of faith, which begins with repentance—a conversion of the heart and mind that involves turning away from sin to God (Matt 4:17; see also 3:2, 8-10; 11:20-24; 12:38-42).<\/p>\n<p>A misapplication of the concept of salvation by grace alone has led to a false dichotomy between faith and works. Salvation is not achieved by works, but neither is it without works (see Gal 5:6, 21; Eph 2:10; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:8). Jesus promises blessing and reward to those who live in accord with God’s will (Matt 5:3-12). Consequently, righteousness is required of those who want to enter the Kingdom (5:20-48; 7:21; 22:11-14; 23:3). Faith that does not result in works is not saving faith (Jas 2:14-26).<\/p>\n<p>James, in his conspicuous emphasis on faithfulness to God, argues for charitable deeds as an expression of faith (2:14-26). A faith relationship with God cannot be based merely on believing a true statement (2:19). Saving faith results in actions (1:22-25; 2:14). Faithful actions emulate God, who generously gives good gifts (1:5, 17; 4:6). Faith and good deeds are therefore inseparable. As with Abraham, good deeds show that a person has complete faith and is righteous before God (2:23; see Gen 15:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught and modeled faith that does good deeds (see Matt 5:13-16), and Paul also affirmed the need for good deeds (Rom 2:6; Gal 6:5-10; Eph 2:10; Phil 2:12-13; 1 Thes 1:3). James points to some specific actions which demonstrate faith, including caring for orphans and widows (1:27), avoiding favoritism toward the rich (2:1-7), providing food and clothing for the poor (2:15-17), controlling one’s tongue (3:1-12), promoting peace (3:17-18), and refraining from judging others (4:11-12). All of these things can be understood as “faith expressing itself in love” (Gal 5:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:1; 22:1-19; Lev 22:31; Hab 2:4; Matt 3:2, 8-10; 4:17; 5:3-12, 20-48; 7:13-27; 10:32-33; 11:20-24; 12:33-42; 13:3-9, 18-23; 15:15-20; 16:27; 25:31-46; John 15:2; Rom 2:6; Gal 5:6, 16-26; 6:5-10; Eph 2:8-10; 5:3-9; Phil 2:12-13; Heb 11:1-40; Jas 2:14-26; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:6-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Faith and Good Deeds Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20). The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consiste...","summary_en":"Faith and Good Deeds Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20). The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consiste...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148076,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Faith and Good Deeds","title_en":"Faith and Good Deeds","content_ro":"<h3>Faith and Good Deeds<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consistent feature of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Matt 7:13-27; 13:3-9, 18-23; 16:27). For Jesus, works are a sure indicator of faith, which begins with repentance—a conversion of the heart and mind that involves turning away from sin to God (Matt 4:17; see also 3:2, 8-10; 11:20-24; 12:38-42).<\/p>\n<p>A misapplication of the concept of salvation by grace alone has led to a false dichotomy between faith and works. Salvation is not achieved by works, but neither is it without works (see Gal 5:6, 21; Eph 2:10; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:8). Jesus promises blessing and reward to those who live in accord with God’s will (Matt 5:3-12). Consequently, righteousness is required of those who want to enter the Kingdom (5:20-48; 7:21; 22:11-14; 23:3). Faith that does not result in works is not saving faith (Jas 2:14-26).<\/p>\n<p>James, in his conspicuous emphasis on faithfulness to God, argues for charitable deeds as an expression of faith (2:14-26). A faith relationship with God cannot be based merely on believing a true statement (2:19). Saving faith results in actions (1:22-25; 2:14). Faithful actions emulate God, who generously gives good gifts (1:5, 17; 4:6). Faith and good deeds are therefore inseparable. As with Abraham, good deeds show that a person has complete faith and is righteous before God (2:23; see Gen 15:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught and modeled faith that does good deeds (see Matt 5:13-16), and Paul also affirmed the need for good deeds (Rom 2:6; Gal 6:5-10; Eph 2:10; Phil 2:12-13; 1 Thes 1:3). James points to some specific actions which demonstrate faith, including caring for orphans and widows (1:27), avoiding favoritism toward the rich (2:1-7), providing food and clothing for the poor (2:15-17), controlling one’s tongue (3:1-12), promoting peace (3:17-18), and refraining from judging others (4:11-12). All of these things can be understood as “faith expressing itself in love” (Gal 5:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:1; 22:1-19; Lev 22:31; Hab 2:4; Matt 3:2, 8-10; 4:17; 5:3-12, 20-48; 7:13-27; 10:32-33; 11:20-24; 12:33-42; 13:3-9, 18-23; 15:15-20; 16:27; 25:31-46; John 15:2; Rom 2:6; Gal 5:6, 16-26; 6:5-10; Eph 2:8-10; 5:3-9; Phil 2:12-13; Heb 11:1-40; Jas 2:14-26; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:6-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Faith and Good Deeds<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consistent feature of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Matt 7:13-27; 13:3-9, 18-23; 16:27). For Jesus, works are a sure indicator of faith, which begins with repentance—a conversion of the heart and mind that involves turning away from sin to God (Matt 4:17; see also 3:2, 8-10; 11:20-24; 12:38-42).<\/p>\n<p>A misapplication of the concept of salvation by grace alone has led to a false dichotomy between faith and works. Salvation is not achieved by works, but neither is it without works (see Gal 5:6, 21; Eph 2:10; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:8). Jesus promises blessing and reward to those who live in accord with God’s will (Matt 5:3-12). Consequently, righteousness is required of those who want to enter the Kingdom (5:20-48; 7:21; 22:11-14; 23:3). Faith that does not result in works is not saving faith (Jas 2:14-26).<\/p>\n<p>James, in his conspicuous emphasis on faithfulness to God, argues for charitable deeds as an expression of faith (2:14-26). A faith relationship with God cannot be based merely on believing a true statement (2:19). Saving faith results in actions (1:22-25; 2:14). Faithful actions emulate God, who generously gives good gifts (1:5, 17; 4:6). Faith and good deeds are therefore inseparable. As with Abraham, good deeds show that a person has complete faith and is righteous before God (2:23; see Gen 15:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught and modeled faith that does good deeds (see Matt 5:13-16), and Paul also affirmed the need for good deeds (Rom 2:6; Gal 6:5-10; Eph 2:10; Phil 2:12-13; 1 Thes 1:3). James points to some specific actions which demonstrate faith, including caring for orphans and widows (1:27), avoiding favoritism toward the rich (2:1-7), providing food and clothing for the poor (2:15-17), controlling one’s tongue (3:1-12), promoting peace (3:17-18), and refraining from judging others (4:11-12). All of these things can be understood as “faith expressing itself in love” (Gal 5:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:1; 22:1-19; Lev 22:31; Hab 2:4; Matt 3:2, 8-10; 4:17; 5:3-12, 20-48; 7:13-27; 10:32-33; 11:20-24; 12:33-42; 13:3-9, 18-23; 15:15-20; 16:27; 25:31-46; John 15:2; Rom 2:6; Gal 5:6, 16-26; 6:5-10; Eph 2:8-10; 5:3-9; Phil 2:12-13; Heb 11:1-40; Jas 2:14-26; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:6-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Faith and Good Deeds Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20). The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consiste...","summary_en":"Faith and Good Deeds Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20). The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consiste...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"21":[{"id":4550,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Bethsaida","title_en":"Bethsaida","content_ro":"<h3>BETHSAIDA<\/h3>\n<li>1. Town northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Bethsaida was the home of three of Jesus’ disciples: Andrew, Peter, and Philip (Jn 1:44; 12:21). Jesus announced that calamity would come upon Bethsaida because of its unbelief in spite of the mighty works he had done there (Mt 11:21-22; Lk 10:13). A blind man was healed in Bethsaida (Mk 8:22-26), and nearby over 5,000 people were fed by the miracle of the loaves and fish (Mk 6:34-45; Lk 9:10-17).<\/li>\n<p>Bethsaida is mentioned in several ancient sources, chiefly the writings of Josephus, a first-century <span>AD<\/span> Jewish historian. Two Bethsaidas, one on each side of the Sea of Galilee, were once postulated because the reference in Mark mentions the feeding of the 5,000 as happening across the lake from Bethsaida, whereas in Luke it seems to have taken place near Bethsaida. One solution is that the miracle occurred in the district surrounding Bethsaida, but that the quickest way to reach the city itself was to cross part of the lake. Such an interpretation questions the traditional location of the miracle (et-Tabgha on the west shore, nearer to Capernaum) but is preferable to the proposal of two Bethsaidas so close to each other.<\/p>\n<p>Bethsaida was merely a fishing village until it was enlarged and beautified by Philip the tetrarch (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 34), son of Herod the Great, after the death of Caesar Augustus. Philip was later buried there, according to Josephus. Bethsaida’s name was changed to Julias in honor of Julia, daughter of Augustus. That city was defended by Josephus when he was its military commander during the first Jewish revolt against Rome (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70).<\/p>\n<p>Josephus wrote that Bethsaida was “at the lake of Gennesareth” but “near to the Jordan River.” He also said that it was in lower Gaulanitis, a district that touched the northeast quarter of the Sea of Galilee. There is, however, no ancient “tell” or ruin fitting the size or description of the city near either the lake or the river. A suggestion that the small harbor of el-’Araj is the site of Bethsaida has little archaeological support, but et-Tell, located about two miles (3.2 kilometers) from the lake, shows evidence of extensive Roman occupation and building activity. At present, et-Tell seems to be the most satisfactory candidate for identification of Bethsaida.<\/p>\n<li>2. A variant name for the pool at Jerusalem, otherwise called Bethesda or Beth-zatha. <em>See<\/em> Bethesda; Beth-zatha.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>BETHSAIDA<\/h3>\n<li>1. Town northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Bethsaida was the home of three of Jesus’ disciples: Andrew, Peter, and Philip (Jn 1:44; 12:21). Jesus announced that calamity would come upon Bethsaida because of its unbelief in spite of the mighty works he had done there (Mt 11:21-22; Lk 10:13). A blind man was healed in Bethsaida (Mk 8:22-26), and nearby over 5,000 people were fed by the miracle of the loaves and fish (Mk 6:34-45; Lk 9:10-17).<\/li>\n<p>Bethsaida is mentioned in several ancient sources, chiefly the writings of Josephus, a first-century <span>AD<\/span> Jewish historian. Two Bethsaidas, one on each side of the Sea of Galilee, were once postulated because the reference in Mark mentions the feeding of the 5,000 as happening across the lake from Bethsaida, whereas in Luke it seems to have taken place near Bethsaida. One solution is that the miracle occurred in the district surrounding Bethsaida, but that the quickest way to reach the city itself was to cross part of the lake. Such an interpretation questions the traditional location of the miracle (et-Tabgha on the west shore, nearer to Capernaum) but is preferable to the proposal of two Bethsaidas so close to each other.<\/p>\n<p>Bethsaida was merely a fishing village until it was enlarged and beautified by Philip the tetrarch (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 34), son of Herod the Great, after the death of Caesar Augustus. Philip was later buried there, according to Josephus. Bethsaida’s name was changed to Julias in honor of Julia, daughter of Augustus. That city was defended by Josephus when he was its military commander during the first Jewish revolt against Rome (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70).<\/p>\n<p>Josephus wrote that Bethsaida was “at the lake of Gennesareth” but “near to the Jordan River.” He also said that it was in lower Gaulanitis, a district that touched the northeast quarter of the Sea of Galilee. There is, however, no ancient “tell” or ruin fitting the size or description of the city near either the lake or the river. A suggestion that the small harbor of el-’Araj is the site of Bethsaida has little archaeological support, but et-Tell, located about two miles (3.2 kilometers) from the lake, shows evidence of extensive Roman occupation and building activity. At present, et-Tell seems to be the most satisfactory candidate for identification of Bethsaida.<\/p>\n<li>2. A variant name for the pool at Jerusalem, otherwise called Bethesda or Beth-zatha. <em>See<\/em> Bethesda; Beth-zatha.<\/li>","summary_ro":"BETHSAIDA 1. Town northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Bethsaida was the home of three of Jesus’ disciples: Andrew, Peter, and Philip (Jn 1:44; 12:21). Jesus announced that calamity would come upon Bethsaida because of its unbelief in spite of the mighty works he had done there (Mt 11:21-22; Lk 10:13). A blind man was healed in Bethsaida (Mk 8:22-26), and nearby over 5,000 people were fed by the miracle of the loaves and fish (Mk 6:34-45; Lk 9:10-17). Bethsaida is mentioned in several ancient sou...","summary_en":"BETHSAIDA 1. Town northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Bethsaida was the home of three of Jesus’ disciples: Andrew, Peter, and Philip (Jn 1:44; 12:21). Jesus announced that calamity would come upon Bethsaida because of its unbelief in spite of the mighty works he had done there (Mt 11:21-22; Lk 10:13). A blind man was healed in Bethsaida (Mk 8:22-26), and nearby over 5,000 people were fed by the miracle of the loaves and fish (Mk 6:34-45; Lk 9:10-17). Bethsaida is mentioned in several ancient sou...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":6922,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"and Cloth Manufacturing*, Cloth","title_en":"and Cloth Manufacturing*, Cloth","content_ro":"<h3>CLOTH AND CLOTH MANUFACTURING*<\/h3>\n<p>Since antiquity, cloth has been made from such natural fibers as flax, wool, cotton, silk, and hair. Linen (spun from flax), wool, and sackcloth (woven from goat’s or camel’s hair) are the fabrics most frequently mentioned in Scripture. The Bible also refers to silk and cotton.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FibersforWeaving\">Fibers for Weaving<\/p>\n<h5>Linen<\/h5>\n<p>Flax was cultivated extensively in the Near East. In Palestine it flourished around the Sea of Galilee. The stalks were gathered into bundles and steeped in water, causing the fibers to separate from the nonfibrous stem. The bundles were then opened and spread out to dry in the sun. Rahab hid Hebrew spies on the roof of her house amid stalks of flax laid out to dry (Jos 2:6). After drying, the stalks were split and combed to separate the fibers for spinning and weaving into linen. Biblical references to flax include Exodus 9:31, Judges 15:14, and Proverbs 31:13.<\/p>\n<p>The type of fabric from which the priestly coats, girdles, and caps (Ex 28:40) were made is not stated, though the mention of linen breeches may imply that most, if not all, of the priestly garments were made of linen. The finest linen, worn by kings and nobles, served as a mark of honor or as a special gift. Joseph was given a garment of fine linen when he was made ruler of Egypt (Gn 41:42). When the Hebrews left Egypt at the time of the exodus, they took with them a high-quality linen and donated it to the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 35:6). A craftsman who was trained to work in fine linen came from Tyre to work for Solomon on temple hangings (2 Chr 2:14).<\/p>\n<h5>Wool<\/h5>\n<p>Wool was another extremely important fiber in the Near Eastern economy. Wool could come in any shade from creamy yellow to tan or black. Sometimes to obtain pure white wool a sheep was kept wrapped to prevent its fleece from being soiled. Preparation of wool was a home craft in antiquity (Prv 31:13; cf. Ex 35:25). Wool had to be washed thoroughly, dried, and then beaten to detach the fibers and remove the dirt before being carded and spun. Women spun their own yarn and wove garments for their families. Wool was the fabric of seminomadic, sheep-raising people; by contrast, the growing of flax required a more settled lifestyle.<\/p>\n<h5>Goat’s Hair<\/h5>\n<p>A thick cloth that was extremely warm as well as waterproof was woven from goat’s hair (Ex 35:23, 26). Clothing worn by the poor was often manufactured from goat’s or camel’s hair. That coarse-haired fabric (sackcloth) on occasions was worn next to the skin as a form of penitence (Neh 9:1; Dn 9:3; Mt 11:21), as a mourning vestment (Gn 37:34; 2 Sm 3:31), or even as a prophetic protest against luxurious living (Rv 11:3).<\/p>\n<h5>Cotton, Silk, and Gold Thread<\/h5>\n<p>The people of Judea would certainly have been aware of cotton during their Persian exile (beginning in 538 <span>BC<\/span>). Cotton is mentioned once in a description of elaborate hangings in the Persian king’s palace (Est 1:6). It is doubtful, however, that cotton was cultivated in ancient Palestine or even found there until after the exile.<\/p>\n<p>Earlier in Israel’s history, part of the tabernacle fabric was woven with gold thread, made from thin sheets of beaten gold cut into fine wire strips (Ex 39:3). A wider type of gold wire with a flat surface was used to adorn expensive Palestinian and Syrian garments. An ancient hank of fine gold thread was uncovered during excavations at Dura on the Euphrates River.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Spinning\">Spinning<\/p>\n<p>In Bible times a spindle was a slender rounded stick, tapered and notched at one end and weighted at the other end with a “whorl” of clay, stone, glass, or metal to serve as a kind of flywheel. The thread spun at the tapered end was wound on the spindle. Another thin stick, called a distaff, held the fibers to be fed onto the twirling spindle.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LoomsandWeaving\">Looms and Weaving<\/p>\n<p>Weaving is the interlacing of “warp” threads stretched on a loom with threads of “weft” or “woof” passed from side to side over and under the warp. A primitive warp could be stretched around pegs or rods tied to a tree or roof beam and sometimes connected to the weaver’s waist.<\/p>\n<p>As weaving technique developed, three types of loom emerged: the horizontal ground loom, the vertical two-beamed loom, and the warp-weighted loom. In a horizontal ground loom the warp was stretched between two wooden beams fastened to the ground by four pegs. Traveling nomads could pull out the pegs and roll up the unfinished weaving on the beams. Delilah wove Samson’s hair on a horizontal ground loom (Jgs 16:13-14).<\/p>\n<p>The vertical two-beamed loom had its warp stretched on a rectangular wooden frame. In addition to the two uprights and two warp beams, another beam was often used to maintain the tension of the warp, especially on longer lengths.<\/p>\n<p>The warp-weighted loom, also on a vertical frame, was worked from the top down. The lower edge was weighted with loom weights, often shaped lumps of clay.<\/p>\n<p>The degree of sophistication in weaving techniques in biblical times is seen in the specifications regarding fabrics for the tabernacle and its court. Hangings for the court were to be 50 yards (45.7 meters) long and probably a standard 2 yards (1.8 meters) wide (Ex 27:9-18). The tabernacle veil (26:31) and screen for the entrance (v 36) were to be of “blue and purple and scarlet stuff,” probably highlighted or embroidered with linen.<\/p>\n<p>Garments such as the tunic that Jesus wore were woven in one piece with the selvage (edge of the weaving) coming at the neck and hem, the areas of greatest wear. A tunic woven on a narrow loom would be constructed of three pieces.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ClothDyesandDyeing\">Cloth Dyes and Dyeing<\/p>\n<p>Like the fibers, the dyes used in antiquity were also of animal or plant origin. A red dye was obtained from the body of an insect. Purple came mainly from two kinds of mollusks found in many parts of the eastern Mediterranean seaboard. The purest shade of purple could be obtained from mollusks found on the shore at Tyre, so a large industry developed there (Ez 27:1-3,16). Purple, the most expensive dye, remained the distinguishing color of kings and nobles. The first Christian convert in Europe, Lydia, was a businesswoman who sold the costly purple cloth (Acts 16:14). Yellow was obtained from the petals and flower heads of the safflower. Saffron (orange-yellow) came from the stigmas of the crocus that grew extensively in Syria and Egypt. Green was usually concocted from a mixture of other dyes. In Hellenistic times woad, a plant of the mustard family, was cultivated in Mesopotamia for its blue dye. Indigo was grown in Egypt and Syria. Dyeing in antiquity was often carried out in large vats, pictures of which have been found in paintings and on pottery. The ruins of structures including vats have been excavated at some Palestinian sites.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CLOTH AND CLOTH MANUFACTURING*<\/h3>\n<p>Since antiquity, cloth has been made from such natural fibers as flax, wool, cotton, silk, and hair. Linen (spun from flax), wool, and sackcloth (woven from goat’s or camel’s hair) are the fabrics most frequently mentioned in Scripture. The Bible also refers to silk and cotton.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FibersforWeaving\">Fibers for Weaving<\/p>\n<h5>Linen<\/h5>\n<p>Flax was cultivated extensively in the Near East. In Palestine it flourished around the Sea of Galilee. The stalks were gathered into bundles and steeped in water, causing the fibers to separate from the nonfibrous stem. The bundles were then opened and spread out to dry in the sun. Rahab hid Hebrew spies on the roof of her house amid stalks of flax laid out to dry (Jos 2:6). After drying, the stalks were split and combed to separate the fibers for spinning and weaving into linen. Biblical references to flax include Exodus 9:31, Judges 15:14, and Proverbs 31:13.<\/p>\n<p>The type of fabric from which the priestly coats, girdles, and caps (Ex 28:40) were made is not stated, though the mention of linen breeches may imply that most, if not all, of the priestly garments were made of linen. The finest linen, worn by kings and nobles, served as a mark of honor or as a special gift. Joseph was given a garment of fine linen when he was made ruler of Egypt (Gn 41:42). When the Hebrews left Egypt at the time of the exodus, they took with them a high-quality linen and donated it to the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 35:6). A craftsman who was trained to work in fine linen came from Tyre to work for Solomon on temple hangings (2 Chr 2:14).<\/p>\n<h5>Wool<\/h5>\n<p>Wool was another extremely important fiber in the Near Eastern economy. Wool could come in any shade from creamy yellow to tan or black. Sometimes to obtain pure white wool a sheep was kept wrapped to prevent its fleece from being soiled. Preparation of wool was a home craft in antiquity (Prv 31:13; cf. Ex 35:25). Wool had to be washed thoroughly, dried, and then beaten to detach the fibers and remove the dirt before being carded and spun. Women spun their own yarn and wove garments for their families. Wool was the fabric of seminomadic, sheep-raising people; by contrast, the growing of flax required a more settled lifestyle.<\/p>\n<h5>Goat’s Hair<\/h5>\n<p>A thick cloth that was extremely warm as well as waterproof was woven from goat’s hair (Ex 35:23, 26). Clothing worn by the poor was often manufactured from goat’s or camel’s hair. That coarse-haired fabric (sackcloth) on occasions was worn next to the skin as a form of penitence (Neh 9:1; Dn 9:3; Mt 11:21), as a mourning vestment (Gn 37:34; 2 Sm 3:31), or even as a prophetic protest against luxurious living (Rv 11:3).<\/p>\n<h5>Cotton, Silk, and Gold Thread<\/h5>\n<p>The people of Judea would certainly have been aware of cotton during their Persian exile (beginning in 538 <span>BC<\/span>). Cotton is mentioned once in a description of elaborate hangings in the Persian king’s palace (Est 1:6). It is doubtful, however, that cotton was cultivated in ancient Palestine or even found there until after the exile.<\/p>\n<p>Earlier in Israel’s history, part of the tabernacle fabric was woven with gold thread, made from thin sheets of beaten gold cut into fine wire strips (Ex 39:3). A wider type of gold wire with a flat surface was used to adorn expensive Palestinian and Syrian garments. An ancient hank of fine gold thread was uncovered during excavations at Dura on the Euphrates River.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Spinning\">Spinning<\/p>\n<p>In Bible times a spindle was a slender rounded stick, tapered and notched at one end and weighted at the other end with a “whorl” of clay, stone, glass, or metal to serve as a kind of flywheel. The thread spun at the tapered end was wound on the spindle. Another thin stick, called a distaff, held the fibers to be fed onto the twirling spindle.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LoomsandWeaving\">Looms and Weaving<\/p>\n<p>Weaving is the interlacing of “warp” threads stretched on a loom with threads of “weft” or “woof” passed from side to side over and under the warp. A primitive warp could be stretched around pegs or rods tied to a tree or roof beam and sometimes connected to the weaver’s waist.<\/p>\n<p>As weaving technique developed, three types of loom emerged: the horizontal ground loom, the vertical two-beamed loom, and the warp-weighted loom. In a horizontal ground loom the warp was stretched between two wooden beams fastened to the ground by four pegs. Traveling nomads could pull out the pegs and roll up the unfinished weaving on the beams. Delilah wove Samson’s hair on a horizontal ground loom (Jgs 16:13-14).<\/p>\n<p>The vertical two-beamed loom had its warp stretched on a rectangular wooden frame. In addition to the two uprights and two warp beams, another beam was often used to maintain the tension of the warp, especially on longer lengths.<\/p>\n<p>The warp-weighted loom, also on a vertical frame, was worked from the top down. The lower edge was weighted with loom weights, often shaped lumps of clay.<\/p>\n<p>The degree of sophistication in weaving techniques in biblical times is seen in the specifications regarding fabrics for the tabernacle and its court. Hangings for the court were to be 50 yards (45.7 meters) long and probably a standard 2 yards (1.8 meters) wide (Ex 27:9-18). The tabernacle veil (26:31) and screen for the entrance (v 36) were to be of “blue and purple and scarlet stuff,” probably highlighted or embroidered with linen.<\/p>\n<p>Garments such as the tunic that Jesus wore were woven in one piece with the selvage (edge of the weaving) coming at the neck and hem, the areas of greatest wear. A tunic woven on a narrow loom would be constructed of three pieces.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ClothDyesandDyeing\">Cloth Dyes and Dyeing<\/p>\n<p>Like the fibers, the dyes used in antiquity were also of animal or plant origin. A red dye was obtained from the body of an insect. Purple came mainly from two kinds of mollusks found in many parts of the eastern Mediterranean seaboard. The purest shade of purple could be obtained from mollusks found on the shore at Tyre, so a large industry developed there (Ez 27:1-3,16). Purple, the most expensive dye, remained the distinguishing color of kings and nobles. The first Christian convert in Europe, Lydia, was a businesswoman who sold the costly purple cloth (Acts 16:14). Yellow was obtained from the petals and flower heads of the safflower. Saffron (orange-yellow) came from the stigmas of the crocus that grew extensively in Syria and Egypt. Green was usually concocted from a mixture of other dyes. In Hellenistic times woad, a plant of the mustard family, was cultivated in Mesopotamia for its blue dye. Indigo was grown in Egypt and Syria. Dyeing in antiquity was often carried out in large vats, pictures of which have been found in paintings and on pottery. The ruins of structures including vats have been excavated at some Palestinian sites.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CLOTH AND CLOTH MANUFACTURING* Since antiquity, cloth has been made from such natural fibers as flax, wool, cotton, silk, and hair. Linen (spun from flax), wool, and sackcloth (woven from goat’s or camel’s hair) are the fabrics most frequently mentioned in Scripture. The Bible also refers to silk and cotton. Fibers for Weaving Linen Flax was cultivated extensively in the Near East. In Palestine it flourished around the Sea of Galilee. The stalks were gathered into bundles and steeped in water...","summary_en":"CLOTH AND CLOTH MANUFACTURING* Since antiquity, cloth has been made from such natural fibers as flax, wool, cotton, silk, and hair. Linen (spun from flax), wool, and sackcloth (woven from goat’s or camel’s hair) are the fabrics most frequently mentioned in Scripture. The Bible also refers to silk and cotton. Fibers for Weaving Linen Flax was cultivated extensively in the Near East. In Palestine it flourished around the Sea of Galilee. The stalks were gathered into bundles and steeped in water...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":13162,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Galilee","title_en":"Galilee","content_ro":"<h3>GALILEE<\/h3>\n<p>Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalBackground\">Historical Background<\/p>\n<p>In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in the hill country of Naphtali (Jos 20:7; cf. 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76).<\/p>\n<p>Galilee originally designated the area occupied by the tribes of Naphtali, Zebulun (Is 9:1), and possibly Asher (if Cabul in Jos 19:27 is the same city as in 1 Kgs 9:11-13). None of those tribes was able to completely expel the original Canaanite inhabitants (Jgs 1:30-33; 2:1-4), and as a result, Galilee tended to be racially mixed. The cities that King Solomon gave to Hiram, gentile king of Tyre, were within Galilee (1 Kgs 9:11), and the gentile intermixture in that area may have influenced Solomon’s choice of those cities for a gift. This racially mixed condition is also the probable basis for the designation in Isaiah 9:1, “Galilee of the nations” (cf. Mt 4:15; 1 Macc 5:15).<\/p>\n<p>During the monarchy, Galilee was a buffer zone between Israel and Syria, and it bore the brunt of Syrian invasions against Israel. This fact is cited by the prophet Isaiah (Is 9:1), but he saw it as the prelude to a brighter day when the messianic king would reign. Galilee was conquered by Syrian King Ben-hadad (1 Kgs 15:20) and was probably recovered by Israel’s King Ahab. Galilee was later subjugated by the Arameans under Hazael (2 Kgs 10:32; 12:18; 13:22) and regained by Jeroboam II (2 Kgs 14:23-25). As a result of Assyrian conquests in the area of Damascus and Galilee in 732 <span>BC<\/span> by Tiglath-pileser III (2 Kgs 15:29), more Gentiles were imported into the area while many of the Jewish inhabitants were deported. This naturally led to greater gentile influence and domination in Galilee. Under the successive influence of Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Syria, Galilee was constantly experiencing infiltration and migration. From the time of the Assyrian conquest of Israel to about the end of the second century <span>BC<\/span>, Galilee’s population was dominated by Gentiles, with only a few Jews.<\/p>\n<p>The Jews remaining in Galilee were brought to Judea by Simon Maccabeus in 164 <span>BC<\/span> (1 Macc 5:21-23). Galilee was conquered by Aristobulus I (104–103 <span>BC<\/span>), who forced the inhabitants to be circumcised and to submit to Jewish laws, a work that probably already had been initiated by John Hyrcanus (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n\n<p>Herod the Great (ruler under Rome, 37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) affixed Galilee to his kingdom, and more Jews were attracted there. Josephus recorded that Galilee had 240 cities and villages and 100,000 men available to fight against the Romans. After the death of Herod the Great, Galilee was included in the tetrarchy of Herod Antipas (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 39). With the banishment of Herod Antipas in <span>AD<\/span> 39, Galilee was added to the territory of Herod Agrippa I, who ruled it until he died in <span>AD<\/span> 44. Rome directly administered Galilee until it was put under the rule of Herod Agrippa II. By siding with the Romans during the Jewish revolts, he was able to retain his position until <span>AD<\/span> 100. In spite of the Galileans’ attempt to gain independence, the revolutionary faction was brought under subjection by Vespasian in <span>AD<\/span> 67. After Herod Agrippa II’s death, Galilee became part of the Roman province of Syria.<\/p>\n<p>Following the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sanhedrin and many other Jews of southern Palestine flocked to Galilee. As a result, such cities as Tiberias and Sepphoris became Jewish, and the dispersed Jews came to think of Galilee as their center. Tiberias became a center for Jewish learning, and it was there that such major contributions as the Tiberian system of vowel pointing the Hebrew consonantal text were made, as well as the formulation of the Mishnah and the Palestinian Talmud.<\/p>\n<p>From about <span>AD<\/span> 451 until the Muslim rule over Galilee began in the seventh century, Galilee was governed by the Christian patriarchate of Jerusalem, set up by the Council of Chalcedon in <span>AD<\/span> 451. Muslim rule from the seventh century on was continuous except for the intervals caused by the twelfth-century Crusades and World War I. All of Galilee has been included in the modern state of Israel since its establishment in 1948.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Boundaries\">Boundaries<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was bounded on the east by the upper Jordan River and the Sea of Galilee and on the south by the plain of Esdraelon, which served as a natural boundary between Galilee and Samaria. At times the plain was included in Galilee, as it was during the intertestamental period (1 Macc 10:30; 12:47-49). While the northern boundary was uncertain and variable during Galilee’s history, in NT times it reached to Lake Huleh. The western boundary followed the Mediterranean Sea to Mt Carmel.<\/p>\n<p>From the time of the divided kingdom until the Assyrian conquest of Galilee (734 <span>BC<\/span>), it was the northernmost part of the kingdom of Israel. The area was divided into upper Galilee and lower Galilee by the plain of Ramah, which ran between Capernaum and Ptolemais (cf. Jdt 1:8; 1 Macc 12:49; Josephus’s <em>War<\/em> 3.3.1). In the Mishnah (compilation of early rabbinical interpretation of the Law), Galilee is divided into three parts corresponding to the natural divisions of plain, hill country, and mountain. Under Roman rule, Galilee was about 25 to 30 miles (40 to 50 kilometers) from east to west and about 35 to 40 miles (55 to 65 kilometers) from north to south.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>The attractive Galilean landscape is made up of volcanic limestone hills and fertile alluvial plains. Its climate is cooler than that of any other part of Palestine, and its beauty and fertility contrast sharply with the barren, sun-baked hills of southern Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The physical features range from the high mountains in the north to the plain of Esdraelon in the south. Mt Tabor is prominent on the east, while Mt Carmel stands out on the west. Much of upper Galilee is 3,000 feet (914.4 meters) above sea level, and in NT times it was largely forested and less densely inhabited than lower Galilee. Lower Galilee starts at 1,500 to 2,000 feet (450 to 600 meters) above sea level and descends sharply to the Sea of Galilee, more than 600 feet (182.9 meters) below sea level.<\/p>\n<p>Besides the average annual rainfall of 25 inches (63.5 centimeters), Galilee is watered by the streams that flow from springs in the hills and are the main sources of the beautiful Kishon River at Janin, and the headwaters of the Jordan River, the largest river in Palestine. The ground is also moistened by heavy dews resulting from climatic conditions created by the Lebanon mountain range to the north.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cities\">Cities<\/p>\n<p>Among the more notable cities in Galilee’s early history were Kedesh in Naphtali, a city of refuge (Jos 20:7; 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76), and Hazor, about 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee (Jos 11:10; 1 Kgs 9:15). During the time of Christ, Chorazin (Mt 11:21) and Capernaum (4:13; 11:23) were prominent cities located in the northeast near the Sea of Galilee. Capernaum seems to have been a center for Jesus’ ministry in the area (Mt 4:13; Mk 2:1; 9:33; etc.). Nazareth is especially significant as the city of Christ’s childhood (Mt 2:22-23; Lk 2:39; 4:16; etc.). Nain (Lk 7:11-17), located on the northern edge of the mountain now called Little Hermon, and Cana of Galilee (Jn 2:1-11) also figured prominently in Christ’s ministry. Sepphoris and Tiberias were important cities during Roman administration.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RoadsandTravel\">Roads and Travel<\/p>\n<p>Many roads traversed Galilee, and those in NT times were superior due to Roman construction and maintenance.<\/p>\n<p>Among the best-known trade routes was the Via Maris (the Way of the Sea), which ran through Galilee on its way from Damascus to Egypt. Another main road ran from Tiberias, near the Sea of Galilee, to Acco (Ptolemais), a port on the Phoenician coast. Major caravan routes also connected Galilee with the markets of the East. The area was tied together by a network of spurs and connecting roads that branched from the main highways.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Inhabitants\">Inhabitants<\/p>\n<p>The occupants of Galilee (Galileans) were basically Jewish in religious and patriotic orientation, but they were composed of various ethnic elements. The influence of this mixture was sufficient to cause recognizable differences in speech from that of southern Palestine (cf. Mt 26:69, 73). The Galileans absorbed more Greek and Roman influences than did the Judean Jews. The racial mixture, differences in speech, and location caused Judean Jews to view Galilee and its inhabitants with contempt (Jn 1:46; 7:41, 52).<\/p>\n<p>Lower Galilee was densely settled with villages, and in NT times the population was probably about three million. The fertility of the soil and resultant fruitfulness of the country produced a prosperous Jewish populace, particularly in the centuries immediately after the time of Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Government\">Government<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was under the Roman rule of emperors Augustus and Tiberius during the time of Christ. Roman fortifications throughout Galilee were a constant reminder of the presence and influence of the Roman Empire. During Christ’s ministry, Rome installed the tetrarch Herod Antipas (Mt 14:1; Lk 23:5-7) to rule the territory. He was appointed to office when 17 years old. Sepphoris was his first capital; in about <span>AD<\/span> 22 he built Tiberias on the shore of the Sea of Galilee as his new capital, in honor of the emperor.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Products\">Products<\/p>\n<p>Abundant crops enabled Galilee to provide produce for the neighboring Phoenician cities of Tyre and Sidon around the middle of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Main crops included grapes, pomegranates, olives, and grains. Fishing in the Sea of Galilee was a prominent business in NT times (Mk 1:14-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusandGalilee\">Jesus and Galilee<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was raised in Galilee (Lk 4:16), and 11 of his 12 disciples were from there (Judas Iscariot was the only Judean).<\/p>\n<p>The culture, commerce, farming, and fishing business of the area formed the background for much of Jesus’ ministry, as his parables show (Mt 20:1-8; 21:33; Mk 4:3; Lk 13:6-9). The first three Gospels are largely occupied with Christ’s ministry in Galilee, with much of it being spent around the Sea of Galilee. Most of his parables (19 of 32) were spoken here, and the vast majority of his miracles (25 of 33) were performed in Galilee. Jesus received his greatest response in this region. The Sermon on the Mount was spoken in Galilee, and one of its mountains was the scene of the Lord’s transfiguration. Many of the women who followed Christ and ministered to him also came from there (Mt 27:55). Two of Christ’s most significant postresurrection appearances took place in Galilee (Mt 28:16-20; Jn 21:1-23), and one of Christ’s own titles, Jesus of Nazareth (Jn 1:45), identified him as a Galilean.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Galileans\">Galileans<\/p>\n<p>Since Jesus and most of the 12 disciples were from Galilee, it was natural for the term to be applied to all of his followers, especially since it implied that the movement was not as pure as Judean Judaism. Some interpreters believe that Luke 22:59 is an example of the use of “Galilean” as a title; in Acts 1:11 and 2:7 it is merely a geographical reference. One sure reference to Christians by that title appears in the work of the pagan philosopher Epictetus (<span>AD<\/span> 50?–135?), who was impressed with how Christians died for their faith. It is not clear how common the title of Galilean was, but it had obviously spread from Judea to Rome, where Epictetus lived.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Palestine; Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GALILEE<\/h3>\n<p>Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalBackground\">Historical Background<\/p>\n<p>In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in the hill country of Naphtali (Jos 20:7; cf. 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76).<\/p>\n<p>Galilee originally designated the area occupied by the tribes of Naphtali, Zebulun (Is 9:1), and possibly Asher (if Cabul in Jos 19:27 is the same city as in 1 Kgs 9:11-13). None of those tribes was able to completely expel the original Canaanite inhabitants (Jgs 1:30-33; 2:1-4), and as a result, Galilee tended to be racially mixed. The cities that King Solomon gave to Hiram, gentile king of Tyre, were within Galilee (1 Kgs 9:11), and the gentile intermixture in that area may have influenced Solomon’s choice of those cities for a gift. This racially mixed condition is also the probable basis for the designation in Isaiah 9:1, “Galilee of the nations” (cf. Mt 4:15; 1 Macc 5:15).<\/p>\n<p>During the monarchy, Galilee was a buffer zone between Israel and Syria, and it bore the brunt of Syrian invasions against Israel. This fact is cited by the prophet Isaiah (Is 9:1), but he saw it as the prelude to a brighter day when the messianic king would reign. Galilee was conquered by Syrian King Ben-hadad (1 Kgs 15:20) and was probably recovered by Israel’s King Ahab. Galilee was later subjugated by the Arameans under Hazael (2 Kgs 10:32; 12:18; 13:22) and regained by Jeroboam II (2 Kgs 14:23-25). As a result of Assyrian conquests in the area of Damascus and Galilee in 732 <span>BC<\/span> by Tiglath-pileser III (2 Kgs 15:29), more Gentiles were imported into the area while many of the Jewish inhabitants were deported. This naturally led to greater gentile influence and domination in Galilee. Under the successive influence of Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Syria, Galilee was constantly experiencing infiltration and migration. From the time of the Assyrian conquest of Israel to about the end of the second century <span>BC<\/span>, Galilee’s population was dominated by Gentiles, with only a few Jews.<\/p>\n<p>The Jews remaining in Galilee were brought to Judea by Simon Maccabeus in 164 <span>BC<\/span> (1 Macc 5:21-23). Galilee was conquered by Aristobulus I (104–103 <span>BC<\/span>), who forced the inhabitants to be circumcised and to submit to Jewish laws, a work that probably already had been initiated by John Hyrcanus (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n\n<p>Herod the Great (ruler under Rome, 37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) affixed Galilee to his kingdom, and more Jews were attracted there. Josephus recorded that Galilee had 240 cities and villages and 100,000 men available to fight against the Romans. After the death of Herod the Great, Galilee was included in the tetrarchy of Herod Antipas (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 39). With the banishment of Herod Antipas in <span>AD<\/span> 39, Galilee was added to the territory of Herod Agrippa I, who ruled it until he died in <span>AD<\/span> 44. Rome directly administered Galilee until it was put under the rule of Herod Agrippa II. By siding with the Romans during the Jewish revolts, he was able to retain his position until <span>AD<\/span> 100. In spite of the Galileans’ attempt to gain independence, the revolutionary faction was brought under subjection by Vespasian in <span>AD<\/span> 67. After Herod Agrippa II’s death, Galilee became part of the Roman province of Syria.<\/p>\n<p>Following the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sanhedrin and many other Jews of southern Palestine flocked to Galilee. As a result, such cities as Tiberias and Sepphoris became Jewish, and the dispersed Jews came to think of Galilee as their center. Tiberias became a center for Jewish learning, and it was there that such major contributions as the Tiberian system of vowel pointing the Hebrew consonantal text were made, as well as the formulation of the Mishnah and the Palestinian Talmud.<\/p>\n<p>From about <span>AD<\/span> 451 until the Muslim rule over Galilee began in the seventh century, Galilee was governed by the Christian patriarchate of Jerusalem, set up by the Council of Chalcedon in <span>AD<\/span> 451. Muslim rule from the seventh century on was continuous except for the intervals caused by the twelfth-century Crusades and World War I. All of Galilee has been included in the modern state of Israel since its establishment in 1948.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Boundaries\">Boundaries<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was bounded on the east by the upper Jordan River and the Sea of Galilee and on the south by the plain of Esdraelon, which served as a natural boundary between Galilee and Samaria. At times the plain was included in Galilee, as it was during the intertestamental period (1 Macc 10:30; 12:47-49). While the northern boundary was uncertain and variable during Galilee’s history, in NT times it reached to Lake Huleh. The western boundary followed the Mediterranean Sea to Mt Carmel.<\/p>\n<p>From the time of the divided kingdom until the Assyrian conquest of Galilee (734 <span>BC<\/span>), it was the northernmost part of the kingdom of Israel. The area was divided into upper Galilee and lower Galilee by the plain of Ramah, which ran between Capernaum and Ptolemais (cf. Jdt 1:8; 1 Macc 12:49; Josephus’s <em>War<\/em> 3.3.1). In the Mishnah (compilation of early rabbinical interpretation of the Law), Galilee is divided into three parts corresponding to the natural divisions of plain, hill country, and mountain. Under Roman rule, Galilee was about 25 to 30 miles (40 to 50 kilometers) from east to west and about 35 to 40 miles (55 to 65 kilometers) from north to south.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>The attractive Galilean landscape is made up of volcanic limestone hills and fertile alluvial plains. Its climate is cooler than that of any other part of Palestine, and its beauty and fertility contrast sharply with the barren, sun-baked hills of southern Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The physical features range from the high mountains in the north to the plain of Esdraelon in the south. Mt Tabor is prominent on the east, while Mt Carmel stands out on the west. Much of upper Galilee is 3,000 feet (914.4 meters) above sea level, and in NT times it was largely forested and less densely inhabited than lower Galilee. Lower Galilee starts at 1,500 to 2,000 feet (450 to 600 meters) above sea level and descends sharply to the Sea of Galilee, more than 600 feet (182.9 meters) below sea level.<\/p>\n<p>Besides the average annual rainfall of 25 inches (63.5 centimeters), Galilee is watered by the streams that flow from springs in the hills and are the main sources of the beautiful Kishon River at Janin, and the headwaters of the Jordan River, the largest river in Palestine. The ground is also moistened by heavy dews resulting from climatic conditions created by the Lebanon mountain range to the north.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cities\">Cities<\/p>\n<p>Among the more notable cities in Galilee’s early history were Kedesh in Naphtali, a city of refuge (Jos 20:7; 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76), and Hazor, about 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee (Jos 11:10; 1 Kgs 9:15). During the time of Christ, Chorazin (Mt 11:21) and Capernaum (4:13; 11:23) were prominent cities located in the northeast near the Sea of Galilee. Capernaum seems to have been a center for Jesus’ ministry in the area (Mt 4:13; Mk 2:1; 9:33; etc.). Nazareth is especially significant as the city of Christ’s childhood (Mt 2:22-23; Lk 2:39; 4:16; etc.). Nain (Lk 7:11-17), located on the northern edge of the mountain now called Little Hermon, and Cana of Galilee (Jn 2:1-11) also figured prominently in Christ’s ministry. Sepphoris and Tiberias were important cities during Roman administration.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RoadsandTravel\">Roads and Travel<\/p>\n<p>Many roads traversed Galilee, and those in NT times were superior due to Roman construction and maintenance.<\/p>\n<p>Among the best-known trade routes was the Via Maris (the Way of the Sea), which ran through Galilee on its way from Damascus to Egypt. Another main road ran from Tiberias, near the Sea of Galilee, to Acco (Ptolemais), a port on the Phoenician coast. Major caravan routes also connected Galilee with the markets of the East. The area was tied together by a network of spurs and connecting roads that branched from the main highways.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Inhabitants\">Inhabitants<\/p>\n<p>The occupants of Galilee (Galileans) were basically Jewish in religious and patriotic orientation, but they were composed of various ethnic elements. The influence of this mixture was sufficient to cause recognizable differences in speech from that of southern Palestine (cf. Mt 26:69, 73). The Galileans absorbed more Greek and Roman influences than did the Judean Jews. The racial mixture, differences in speech, and location caused Judean Jews to view Galilee and its inhabitants with contempt (Jn 1:46; 7:41, 52).<\/p>\n<p>Lower Galilee was densely settled with villages, and in NT times the population was probably about three million. The fertility of the soil and resultant fruitfulness of the country produced a prosperous Jewish populace, particularly in the centuries immediately after the time of Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Government\">Government<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was under the Roman rule of emperors Augustus and Tiberius during the time of Christ. Roman fortifications throughout Galilee were a constant reminder of the presence and influence of the Roman Empire. During Christ’s ministry, Rome installed the tetrarch Herod Antipas (Mt 14:1; Lk 23:5-7) to rule the territory. He was appointed to office when 17 years old. Sepphoris was his first capital; in about <span>AD<\/span> 22 he built Tiberias on the shore of the Sea of Galilee as his new capital, in honor of the emperor.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Products\">Products<\/p>\n<p>Abundant crops enabled Galilee to provide produce for the neighboring Phoenician cities of Tyre and Sidon around the middle of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Main crops included grapes, pomegranates, olives, and grains. Fishing in the Sea of Galilee was a prominent business in NT times (Mk 1:14-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusandGalilee\">Jesus and Galilee<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was raised in Galilee (Lk 4:16), and 11 of his 12 disciples were from there (Judas Iscariot was the only Judean).<\/p>\n<p>The culture, commerce, farming, and fishing business of the area formed the background for much of Jesus’ ministry, as his parables show (Mt 20:1-8; 21:33; Mk 4:3; Lk 13:6-9). The first three Gospels are largely occupied with Christ’s ministry in Galilee, with much of it being spent around the Sea of Galilee. Most of his parables (19 of 32) were spoken here, and the vast majority of his miracles (25 of 33) were performed in Galilee. Jesus received his greatest response in this region. The Sermon on the Mount was spoken in Galilee, and one of its mountains was the scene of the Lord’s transfiguration. Many of the women who followed Christ and ministered to him also came from there (Mt 27:55). Two of Christ’s most significant postresurrection appearances took place in Galilee (Mt 28:16-20; Jn 21:1-23), and one of Christ’s own titles, Jesus of Nazareth (Jn 1:45), identified him as a Galilean.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Galileans\">Galileans<\/p>\n<p>Since Jesus and most of the 12 disciples were from Galilee, it was natural for the term to be applied to all of his followers, especially since it implied that the movement was not as pure as Judean Judaism. Some interpreters believe that Luke 22:59 is an example of the use of “Galilean” as a title; in Acts 1:11 and 2:7 it is merely a geographical reference. One sure reference to Christians by that title appears in the work of the pagan philosopher Epictetus (<span>AD<\/span> 50?–135?), who was impressed with how Christians died for their faith. It is not clear how common the title of Galilean was, but it had obviously spread from Judea to Rome, where Epictetus lived.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Palestine; Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GALILEE Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.” Historical Background In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in...","summary_en":"GALILEE Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.” Historical Background In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22340,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Korazin","title_en":"Korazin","content_ro":"<h3>KORAZIN<\/h3>\n<p>Palestinian city on which Jesus pronounced woe (Mt 11:21-24; Lk 10:13-14). It was in Korazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum that “most of his miracles” had been done, but the people were generally unresponsive and had not repented (Mt 11:20).<\/p>\n<p>From the biblical references, Korazin was probably in the vicinity of Capernaum and Bethsaida. The church father Jerome (c. <span>AD<\/span> 400) located it two miles (3.2 kilometers) from Capernaum, which is on the northwest shore of the Sea of Galilee. Scholars generally agree that the ruins of Khirbet Kerazeh on the basalt hills north of Capernaum are those of Korazin. The ruins indicate that it was a fairly important city. Remains of a synagogue, probably from the fourth century <span>AD<\/span>, include a carved seat with an inscription, an example of a “Moses’ seat” (Mt 23:2). According to the Jewish Talmud, Korazin was known for its wheat.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KORAZIN<\/h3>\n<p>Palestinian city on which Jesus pronounced woe (Mt 11:21-24; Lk 10:13-14). It was in Korazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum that “most of his miracles” had been done, but the people were generally unresponsive and had not repented (Mt 11:20).<\/p>\n<p>From the biblical references, Korazin was probably in the vicinity of Capernaum and Bethsaida. The church father Jerome (c. <span>AD<\/span> 400) located it two miles (3.2 kilometers) from Capernaum, which is on the northwest shore of the Sea of Galilee. Scholars generally agree that the ruins of Khirbet Kerazeh on the basalt hills north of Capernaum are those of Korazin. The ruins indicate that it was a fairly important city. Remains of a synagogue, probably from the fourth century <span>AD<\/span>, include a carved seat with an inscription, an example of a “Moses’ seat” (Mt 23:2). According to the Jewish Talmud, Korazin was known for its wheat.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KORAZIN Palestinian city on which Jesus pronounced woe (Mt 11:21-24; Lk 10:13-14). It was in Korazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum that “most of his miracles” had been done, but the people were generally unresponsive and had not repented (Mt 11:20). From the biblical references, Korazin was probably in the vicinity of Capernaum and Bethsaida. The church father Jerome (c. AD 400) located it two miles (3.2 kilometers) from Capernaum, which is on the northwest shore of the Sea of Galilee. Scholars g...","summary_en":"KORAZIN Palestinian city on which Jesus pronounced woe (Mt 11:21-24; Lk 10:13-14). It was in Korazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum that “most of his miracles” had been done, but the people were generally unresponsive and had not repented (Mt 11:20). From the biblical references, Korazin was probably in the vicinity of Capernaum and Bethsaida. The church father Jerome (c. AD 400) located it two miles (3.2 kilometers) from Capernaum, which is on the northwest shore of the Sea of Galilee. Scholars g...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33483,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sackcloth","title_en":"Sackcloth","content_ro":"<h3>SACKCLOTH<\/h3>\n<p>Poor quality material or a garment of goat hair usually worn as a symbol of mourning, but also worn by some prophets and captives.<\/p>\n<p>Sackcloth was coarse and probably dark in color (Is 50:3; Rv 6:12). The shape of the garment is disputed. Two views are prominent. One view is that the garment was rectangular, sewn on both sides and one end with spaces left for the head and arms. This shape resembles the grain sacks used by Joseph’s brothers in Egypt (Gn 42:25-27, 35) and the sacks used by the Gibeonites (Jos 9:4; cf. Lv 11:32). A second view is that sackcloth was a small garment resembling a loincloth. Asiatic captives are pictured in such garb. The Hebrew practices of girding the loins with sackcloth (2 Sm 3:31; Is 15:3; 22:12; Jer 4:8) and the placing of sackcloth on the loins (Gn 37:34; 1 Kgs 20:31; Jer 48:37) support this view, though more than one type of garment could have been made from sackcloth. Sackcloth was associated primarily with mourning (Gn 37:34; 1 Kgs 21:27; Lam 2:10). National (2 Kgs 6:30; Neh 9:1; Is 37:1; Jon 3:8) as well as personal crises constituted times for the wearing of sackcloth. Kings (1 Kgs 21:27; 2 Kgs 6:30), priests (Jl 1:13), elders (Lam 2:10), prophets (Is 20:2; Zec 13:4), and cattle (Jon 3:8) all wore sackcloth. Sackcloth was found on the penitent (Neh 9:1; Jer 6:26; cf. Mt 11:21) though such usage was not restricted to Israel (Is 15:3; Jer 49:3; Ez 27:31; Jon 3:5). It has been suggested that the coarse fabric produced physical discomfort and was used to inflict self-punishment on the wearer. There is no evidence, however, to support this position.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Burial, Burial Customs; Mourning.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SACKCLOTH<\/h3>\n<p>Poor quality material or a garment of goat hair usually worn as a symbol of mourning, but also worn by some prophets and captives.<\/p>\n<p>Sackcloth was coarse and probably dark in color (Is 50:3; Rv 6:12). The shape of the garment is disputed. Two views are prominent. One view is that the garment was rectangular, sewn on both sides and one end with spaces left for the head and arms. This shape resembles the grain sacks used by Joseph’s brothers in Egypt (Gn 42:25-27, 35) and the sacks used by the Gibeonites (Jos 9:4; cf. Lv 11:32). A second view is that sackcloth was a small garment resembling a loincloth. Asiatic captives are pictured in such garb. The Hebrew practices of girding the loins with sackcloth (2 Sm 3:31; Is 15:3; 22:12; Jer 4:8) and the placing of sackcloth on the loins (Gn 37:34; 1 Kgs 20:31; Jer 48:37) support this view, though more than one type of garment could have been made from sackcloth. Sackcloth was associated primarily with mourning (Gn 37:34; 1 Kgs 21:27; Lam 2:10). National (2 Kgs 6:30; Neh 9:1; Is 37:1; Jon 3:8) as well as personal crises constituted times for the wearing of sackcloth. Kings (1 Kgs 21:27; 2 Kgs 6:30), priests (Jl 1:13), elders (Lam 2:10), prophets (Is 20:2; Zec 13:4), and cattle (Jon 3:8) all wore sackcloth. Sackcloth was found on the penitent (Neh 9:1; Jer 6:26; cf. Mt 11:21) though such usage was not restricted to Israel (Is 15:3; Jer 49:3; Ez 27:31; Jon 3:5). It has been suggested that the coarse fabric produced physical discomfort and was used to inflict self-punishment on the wearer. There is no evidence, however, to support this position.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Burial, Burial Customs; Mourning.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SACKCLOTH Poor quality material or a garment of goat hair usually worn as a symbol of mourning, but also worn by some prophets and captives. Sackcloth was coarse and probably dark in color (Is 50:3; Rv 6:12). The shape of the garment is disputed. Two views are prominent. One view is that the garment was rectangular, sewn on both sides and one end with spaces left for the head and arms. This shape resembles the grain sacks used by Joseph’s brothers in Egypt (Gn 42:25-27, 35) and the sacks used...","summary_en":"SACKCLOTH Poor quality material or a garment of goat hair usually worn as a symbol of mourning, but also worn by some prophets and captives. Sackcloth was coarse and probably dark in color (Is 50:3; Rv 6:12). The shape of the garment is disputed. Two views are prominent. One view is that the garment was rectangular, sewn on both sides and one end with spaces left for the head and arms. This shape resembles the grain sacks used by Joseph’s brothers in Egypt (Gn 42:25-27, 35) and the sacks used...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34207,"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":35279,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sidonian Sidon (Place)","title_en":"Sidonian Sidon (Place)","content_ro":"<h3>SIDON (Place), SIDONIAN<\/h3>\n<p>City on the Phoenician coast, between Beirut and Tyre; frequently called Zidon in the <span>kjv<\/span>. The present town, Saida, is not regarded as a direct continuation of the ancient city but rather a development of post-Crusader times. The names Sidon and Sidonian appear 38 times in the OT, and Sidon occurs 12 times in the NT.<\/p>\n<p>The relative antiquity of Byblos (Gebal, Jebeil), Tyre, and Sidon may be determined by the “table of nations” (Gn 10), which names Sidon as the firstborn son of Canaan, who was a son of Ham. The territory of the Canaanites extended from Sidon to Gaza and east to the Cities of the Plain.<\/p>\n<p>Sidon is situated 22 miles (35.4 kilometers) north of Tyre, with which it is often associated (e.g., Is 23:1-2; Jer 47:4; Mt 11:21-22); both were much concerned with commerce and industry. Sidon was built on a headland that jutted into the sea toward the southwest. It had two harbors, the northern one having inner and outer ports. Sidon was also a center for the manufacture of the purple dye made from the Murex shellfish.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible mentions Sidon several times in connection with the conquest of Palestine. Joshua defeated the northern confederation under Jabin, king of Hazor, and pursued the enemy as far as “Great Sidon” (Jos 11:8). Joshua also stated that the land of Israel included all of Lebanon, “even all the Sidonians” (13:4-6). The tribal allotment of Asher extended as far north as “Sidon the Great” (19:28), but Asher did not drive out the inhabitants of Sidon (Jgs 1:31).<\/p>\n<p>The gods of Sidon are listed among the foreign deities that Israel served (Jgs 10:6); David’s census included Sidon and Tyre (2 Sm 24:6-7); and during a famine in the time of Ahab, the prophet Elijah was sent to live at the home of a widow in Zarephath (Sarepta) in Sidon (1 Kgs 17:9; Lk 4:25-26). Sidon is referred to often by the Hebrew prophets (Is 23:2, 4, 12; Jer 25:22; 27:3; 47:4; Ez 27:8; Jl 3:4; Zec 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, Jesus healed the daughter of a woman of that area (Mt 15:21-28). People came from as far away as Tyre and Sidon to hear Jesus and to be healed by him (Lk 6:17). On Paul’s voyage to Rome to appear before Caesar, the ship made its first stop at Sidon, where the centurion, Julius, allowed Paul to go ashore to visit friends (Acts 27:3).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SIDON (Place), SIDONIAN<\/h3>\n<p>City on the Phoenician coast, between Beirut and Tyre; frequently called Zidon in the <span>kjv<\/span>. The present town, Saida, is not regarded as a direct continuation of the ancient city but rather a development of post-Crusader times. The names Sidon and Sidonian appear 38 times in the OT, and Sidon occurs 12 times in the NT.<\/p>\n<p>The relative antiquity of Byblos (Gebal, Jebeil), Tyre, and Sidon may be determined by the “table of nations” (Gn 10), which names Sidon as the firstborn son of Canaan, who was a son of Ham. The territory of the Canaanites extended from Sidon to Gaza and east to the Cities of the Plain.<\/p>\n<p>Sidon is situated 22 miles (35.4 kilometers) north of Tyre, with which it is often associated (e.g., Is 23:1-2; Jer 47:4; Mt 11:21-22); both were much concerned with commerce and industry. Sidon was built on a headland that jutted into the sea toward the southwest. It had two harbors, the northern one having inner and outer ports. Sidon was also a center for the manufacture of the purple dye made from the Murex shellfish.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible mentions Sidon several times in connection with the conquest of Palestine. Joshua defeated the northern confederation under Jabin, king of Hazor, and pursued the enemy as far as “Great Sidon” (Jos 11:8). Joshua also stated that the land of Israel included all of Lebanon, “even all the Sidonians” (13:4-6). The tribal allotment of Asher extended as far north as “Sidon the Great” (19:28), but Asher did not drive out the inhabitants of Sidon (Jgs 1:31).<\/p>\n<p>The gods of Sidon are listed among the foreign deities that Israel served (Jgs 10:6); David’s census included Sidon and Tyre (2 Sm 24:6-7); and during a famine in the time of Ahab, the prophet Elijah was sent to live at the home of a widow in Zarephath (Sarepta) in Sidon (1 Kgs 17:9; Lk 4:25-26). Sidon is referred to often by the Hebrew prophets (Is 23:2, 4, 12; Jer 25:22; 27:3; 47:4; Ez 27:8; Jl 3:4; Zec 9:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, Jesus healed the daughter of a woman of that area (Mt 15:21-28). People came from as far away as Tyre and Sidon to hear Jesus and to be healed by him (Lk 6:17). On Paul’s voyage to Rome to appear before Caesar, the ship made its first stop at Sidon, where the centurion, Julius, allowed Paul to go ashore to visit friends (Acts 27:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"SIDON (Place), SIDONIAN City on the Phoenician coast, between Beirut and Tyre; frequently called Zidon in the kjv. The present town, Saida, is not regarded as a direct continuation of the ancient city but rather a development of post-Crusader times. The names Sidon and Sidonian appear 38 times in the OT, and Sidon occurs 12 times in the NT. The relative antiquity of Byblos (Gebal, Jebeil), Tyre, and Sidon may be determined by the “table of nations” (Gn 10), which names Sidon as the firstborn ...","summary_en":"SIDON (Place), SIDONIAN City on the Phoenician coast, between Beirut and Tyre; frequently called Zidon in the kjv. The present town, Saida, is not regarded as a direct continuation of the ancient city but rather a development of post-Crusader times. The names Sidon and Sidonian appear 38 times in the OT, and Sidon occurs 12 times in the NT. The relative antiquity of Byblos (Gebal, Jebeil), Tyre, and Sidon may be determined by the “table of nations” (Gn 10), which names Sidon as the firstborn ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38537,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Woe","title_en":"Woe","content_ro":"<h3>WOE<\/h3>\n<p>An exclamation denoting pain or displeasure. Less frequently, it occurs as a noun denoting a disaster or calamity. For example, in Revelation 9:12, following the release of the demonic locusts from the abyss and their scourge upon those who follow the Beast, John announces, “The first woe is past; two other woes are yet to come” (<span>niv<\/span>). Again, in Revelation 11:14, immediately before the seventh trumpet is sounded John writes, “The second woe has passed; the third woe is coming soon” (<span>niv<\/span>). The woes that Revelation describes are equivalent to the plagues of the OT, although somewhat more intense in that they are demonic in origin.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word is onomatapoeic: <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ouai<\/span> (cf. the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">oi<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hoi<\/span>). It is not necessarily a pronouncement of judgment in every case. At times it is an expression of regret or sorrow about the miserable situation that prompted the exclamation. In each case the context needs to be taken into consideration. In Matthew 11:21 (Lk 10:13) when Jesus says, “Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida!” he was reproaching the people of those cities for their unbelief. The same is true in Luke 17:2 where Jesus pronounces woe upon the one who causes another to sin: “It would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around his neck” (<span>niv<\/span>). In the Lucan Sermon on the Plain, the Beatitudes are followed by four woe statements. These statements are not so much threats as they are expressions of regret or compassion.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WOE<\/h3>\n<p>An exclamation denoting pain or displeasure. Less frequently, it occurs as a noun denoting a disaster or calamity. For example, in Revelation 9:12, following the release of the demonic locusts from the abyss and their scourge upon those who follow the Beast, John announces, “The first woe is past; two other woes are yet to come” (<span>niv<\/span>). Again, in Revelation 11:14, immediately before the seventh trumpet is sounded John writes, “The second woe has passed; the third woe is coming soon” (<span>niv<\/span>). The woes that Revelation describes are equivalent to the plagues of the OT, although somewhat more intense in that they are demonic in origin.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word is onomatapoeic: <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ouai<\/span> (cf. the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">oi<\/span> and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hoi<\/span>). It is not necessarily a pronouncement of judgment in every case. At times it is an expression of regret or sorrow about the miserable situation that prompted the exclamation. In each case the context needs to be taken into consideration. In Matthew 11:21 (Lk 10:13) when Jesus says, “Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida!” he was reproaching the people of those cities for their unbelief. The same is true in Luke 17:2 where Jesus pronounces woe upon the one who causes another to sin: “It would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around his neck” (<span>niv<\/span>). In the Lucan Sermon on the Plain, the Beatitudes are followed by four woe statements. These statements are not so much threats as they are expressions of regret or compassion.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WOE An exclamation denoting pain or displeasure. Less frequently, it occurs as a noun denoting a disaster or calamity. For example, in Revelation 9:12, following the release of the demonic locusts from the abyss and their scourge upon those who follow the Beast, John announces, “The first woe is past; two other woes are yet to come” (niv). Again, in Revelation 11:14, immediately before the seventh trumpet is sounded John writes, “The second woe has passed; the third woe is coming soon” (niv)....","summary_en":"WOE An exclamation denoting pain or displeasure. Less frequently, it occurs as a noun denoting a disaster or calamity. For example, in Revelation 9:12, following the release of the demonic locusts from the abyss and their scourge upon those who follow the Beast, John announces, “The first woe is past; two other woes are yet to come” (niv). Again, in Revelation 11:14, immediately before the seventh trumpet is sounded John writes, “The second woe has passed; the third woe is coming soon” (niv)....","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54704,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:21","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:21-24<\/strong> As Jesus moved through the villages of Galilee—from <em>Korazin<\/em> to <em>Bethsaida<\/em> to <em>Capernaum<\/em>—he gave the people a greater revelation of himself, with a correspondingly more severe judgment when they refused to listen. The severity is indicated by comparison with the pagan cities of <em>Tyre<\/em> (Isa 23; Ezek 26:1–28:19), <em>Sidon<\/em> (Ezek 28:20-23), and <em>Sodom<\/em> (Gen 18:22–19:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:21-24<\/strong> As Jesus moved through the villages of Galilee—from <em>Korazin<\/em> to <em>Bethsaida<\/em> to <em>Capernaum<\/em>—he gave the people a greater revelation of himself, with a correspondingly more severe judgment when they refused to listen. The severity is indicated by comparison with the pagan cities of <em>Tyre<\/em> (Isa 23; Ezek 26:1–28:19), <em>Sidon<\/em> (Ezek 28:20-23), and <em>Sodom<\/em> (Gen 18:22–19:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:21-24 As Jesus moved through the villages of Galilee—from Korazin to Bethsaida to Capernaum—he gave the people a greater revelation of himself, with a correspondingly more severe judgment when they refused to listen. The severity is indicated by comparison with the pagan cities of Tyre (Isa 23; Ezek 26:1–28:19), Sidon (Ezek 28:20-23), and Sodom (Gen 18:22–19:29).","summary_en":"11:21-24 As Jesus moved through the villages of Galilee—from Korazin to Bethsaida to Capernaum—he gave the people a greater revelation of himself, with a correspondingly more severe judgment when they refused to listen. The severity is indicated by comparison with the pagan cities of Tyre (Isa 23; Ezek 26:1–28:19), Sidon (Ezek 28:20-23), and Sodom (Gen 18:22–19:29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82330,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:21","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:21-24<\/strong> As Jesus moved through the villages of Galilee—from <em>Korazin<\/em> to <em>Bethsaida<\/em> to <em>Capernaum<\/em>—he gave the people a greater revelation of himself, with a correspondingly more severe judgment when they refused to listen. The severity is indicated by comparison with the pagan cities of <em>Tyre<\/em> (Isa 23; Ezek 26:1–28:19), <em>Sidon<\/em> (Ezek 28:20-23), and <em>Sodom<\/em> (Gen 18:22–19:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:21-24<\/strong> As Jesus moved through the villages of Galilee—from <em>Korazin<\/em> to <em>Bethsaida<\/em> to <em>Capernaum<\/em>—he gave the people a greater revelation of himself, with a correspondingly more severe judgment when they refused to listen. The severity is indicated by comparison with the pagan cities of <em>Tyre<\/em> (Isa 23; Ezek 26:1–28:19), <em>Sidon<\/em> (Ezek 28:20-23), and <em>Sodom<\/em> (Gen 18:22–19:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:21-24 As Jesus moved through the villages of Galilee—from Korazin to Bethsaida to Capernaum—he gave the people a greater revelation of himself, with a correspondingly more severe judgment when they refused to listen. The severity is indicated by comparison with the pagan cities of Tyre (Isa 23; Ezek 26:1–28:19), Sidon (Ezek 28:20-23), and Sodom (Gen 18:22–19:29).","summary_en":"11:21-24 As Jesus moved through the villages of Galilee—from Korazin to Bethsaida to Capernaum—he gave the people a greater revelation of himself, with a correspondingly more severe judgment when they refused to listen. The severity is indicated by comparison with the pagan cities of Tyre (Isa 23; Ezek 26:1–28:19), Sidon (Ezek 28:20-23), and Sodom (Gen 18:22–19:29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":109956,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:21","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:21-24<\/strong> As Jesus moved through the villages of Galilee—from <em>Korazin<\/em> to <em>Bethsaida<\/em> to <em>Capernaum<\/em>—he gave the people a greater revelation of himself, with a correspondingly more severe judgment when they refused to listen. The severity is indicated by comparison with the pagan cities of <em>Tyre<\/em> (Isa 23; Ezek 26:1–28:19), <em>Sidon<\/em> (Ezek 28:20-23), and <em>Sodom<\/em> (Gen 18:22–19:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:21-24<\/strong> As Jesus moved through the villages of Galilee—from <em>Korazin<\/em> to <em>Bethsaida<\/em> to <em>Capernaum<\/em>—he gave the people a greater revelation of himself, with a correspondingly more severe judgment when they refused to listen. The severity is indicated by comparison with the pagan cities of <em>Tyre<\/em> (Isa 23; Ezek 26:1–28:19), <em>Sidon<\/em> (Ezek 28:20-23), and <em>Sodom<\/em> (Gen 18:22–19:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:21-24 As Jesus moved through the villages of Galilee—from Korazin to Bethsaida to Capernaum—he gave the people a greater revelation of himself, with a correspondingly more severe judgment when they refused to listen. The severity is indicated by comparison with the pagan cities of Tyre (Isa 23; Ezek 26:1–28:19), Sidon (Ezek 28:20-23), and Sodom (Gen 18:22–19:29).","summary_en":"11:21-24 As Jesus moved through the villages of Galilee—from Korazin to Bethsaida to Capernaum—he gave the people a greater revelation of himself, with a correspondingly more severe judgment when they refused to listen. The severity is indicated by comparison with the pagan cities of Tyre (Isa 23; Ezek 26:1–28:19), Sidon (Ezek 28:20-23), and Sodom (Gen 18:22–19:29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137582,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:21","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:21-24<\/strong> As Jesus moved through the villages of Galilee—from <em>Korazin<\/em> to <em>Bethsaida<\/em> to <em>Capernaum<\/em>—he gave the people a greater revelation of himself, with a correspondingly more severe judgment when they refused to listen. The severity is indicated by comparison with the pagan cities of <em>Tyre<\/em> (Isa 23; Ezek 26:1–28:19), <em>Sidon<\/em> (Ezek 28:20-23), and <em>Sodom<\/em> (Gen 18:22–19:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:21-24<\/strong> As Jesus moved through the villages of Galilee—from <em>Korazin<\/em> to <em>Bethsaida<\/em> to <em>Capernaum<\/em>—he gave the people a greater revelation of himself, with a correspondingly more severe judgment when they refused to listen. The severity is indicated by comparison with the pagan cities of <em>Tyre<\/em> (Isa 23; Ezek 26:1–28:19), <em>Sidon<\/em> (Ezek 28:20-23), and <em>Sodom<\/em> (Gen 18:22–19:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:21-24 As Jesus moved through the villages of Galilee—from Korazin to Bethsaida to Capernaum—he gave the people a greater revelation of himself, with a correspondingly more severe judgment when they refused to listen. The severity is indicated by comparison with the pagan cities of Tyre (Isa 23; Ezek 26:1–28:19), Sidon (Ezek 28:20-23), and Sodom (Gen 18:22–19:29).","summary_en":"11:21-24 As Jesus moved through the villages of Galilee—from Korazin to Bethsaida to Capernaum—he gave the people a greater revelation of himself, with a correspondingly more severe judgment when they refused to listen. The severity is indicated by comparison with the pagan cities of Tyre (Isa 23; Ezek 26:1–28:19), Sidon (Ezek 28:20-23), and Sodom (Gen 18:22–19:29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"23":[{"id":6059,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Capernaum","title_en":"Capernaum","content_ro":"<h3>CAPERNAUM<\/h3>\n<p>City of Galilee, mentioned only in the Gospels, which was the headquarters of much of Jesus’ ministry. It lay on the northwest side of the Sea of Galilee (or Lake of Gennesaret). Its name means “village of Nahum,” but it is impossible to say who this Nahum was, whether the OT writer or someone else. Matthew gives us the following information: Capernaum was located near the Sea of Galilee, in the territory of Zebulun and Naphtali (Mt 4:13). The west shore of the lake was settled by the tribe of Naphtali. Two of the characters described as being in Capernaum help to identify its location as being near the border of the Jordan and the political frontier. The story of the centurion (Mt 8:5; Lk 7:2) points to the small garrison of about 100 men found at such a frontier town. The story of Levi’s call to leave the customs post controlling the taxation of the area reflects on the same border character of the town (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jewish evidence argued for Tell Hum as the site for ancient Capernaum. The Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Capharnaum<\/span> is rendered by the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Kaphar nahum<\/span> in Midrash Kohelet 1.8 and 7.26 (c. <span>AD<\/span> 110), proving that Capernaum still existed in the second century. There is no further mention until 1160, when Benjamin of Tudela refers to “Capharnaum which is Kaphar Nahum.” The Franciscans, who acquired the site, have found a considerable number of coins of that period at Tell Hum, and the ruins of the synagogue there may well date from the third century <span>AD<\/span>. Recent excavations of Tell Hum have revealed that it is unquestionably the site for ancient Capernaum. During the excavations, a private house was uncovered beneath a fourth-century Jewish-Christian place of meeting. As early as the first half of the second century, it had served as an assembly hall for the early Christians. Inscriptions and the reports from early Christian travelers make it likely that it was the home of Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Capernaum was an important settlement, with a Roman garrison, adopted by Jesus as his own city after his rejection by Nazareth (Mt 9:1). Here he was at home (Mk 2:1) and performed many miracles (Mk 1:34): the healing of the centurion’s servant (Mt 8:5); the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law (Mk 1:31); and the exorcism of the unclean spirit (Mk 1:23; Lk 4:33). Thus highly favored by the ministry of Jesus, there was also a heavy curse imposed on the city because of its unrepentance: “And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to heaven? You shall be brought down to Hades” (Mt 11:23, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CAPERNAUM<\/h3>\n<p>City of Galilee, mentioned only in the Gospels, which was the headquarters of much of Jesus’ ministry. It lay on the northwest side of the Sea of Galilee (or Lake of Gennesaret). Its name means “village of Nahum,” but it is impossible to say who this Nahum was, whether the OT writer or someone else. Matthew gives us the following information: Capernaum was located near the Sea of Galilee, in the territory of Zebulun and Naphtali (Mt 4:13). The west shore of the lake was settled by the tribe of Naphtali. Two of the characters described as being in Capernaum help to identify its location as being near the border of the Jordan and the political frontier. The story of the centurion (Mt 8:5; Lk 7:2) points to the small garrison of about 100 men found at such a frontier town. The story of Levi’s call to leave the customs post controlling the taxation of the area reflects on the same border character of the town (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jewish evidence argued for Tell Hum as the site for ancient Capernaum. The Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Capharnaum<\/span> is rendered by the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Kaphar nahum<\/span> in Midrash Kohelet 1.8 and 7.26 (c. <span>AD<\/span> 110), proving that Capernaum still existed in the second century. There is no further mention until 1160, when Benjamin of Tudela refers to “Capharnaum which is Kaphar Nahum.” The Franciscans, who acquired the site, have found a considerable number of coins of that period at Tell Hum, and the ruins of the synagogue there may well date from the third century <span>AD<\/span>. Recent excavations of Tell Hum have revealed that it is unquestionably the site for ancient Capernaum. During the excavations, a private house was uncovered beneath a fourth-century Jewish-Christian place of meeting. As early as the first half of the second century, it had served as an assembly hall for the early Christians. Inscriptions and the reports from early Christian travelers make it likely that it was the home of Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Capernaum was an important settlement, with a Roman garrison, adopted by Jesus as his own city after his rejection by Nazareth (Mt 9:1). Here he was at home (Mk 2:1) and performed many miracles (Mk 1:34): the healing of the centurion’s servant (Mt 8:5); the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law (Mk 1:31); and the exorcism of the unclean spirit (Mk 1:23; Lk 4:33). Thus highly favored by the ministry of Jesus, there was also a heavy curse imposed on the city because of its unrepentance: “And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to heaven? You shall be brought down to Hades” (Mt 11:23, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"CAPERNAUM City of Galilee, mentioned only in the Gospels, which was the headquarters of much of Jesus’ ministry. It lay on the northwest side of the Sea of Galilee (or Lake of Gennesaret). Its name means “village of Nahum,” but it is impossible to say who this Nahum was, whether the OT writer or someone else. Matthew gives us the following information: Capernaum was located near the Sea of Galilee, in the territory of Zebulun and Naphtali (Mt 4:13). The west shore of the lake was settled by t...","summary_en":"CAPERNAUM City of Galilee, mentioned only in the Gospels, which was the headquarters of much of Jesus’ ministry. It lay on the northwest side of the Sea of Galilee (or Lake of Gennesaret). Its name means “village of Nahum,” but it is impossible to say who this Nahum was, whether the OT writer or someone else. Matthew gives us the following information: Capernaum was located near the Sea of Galilee, in the territory of Zebulun and Naphtali (Mt 4:13). The west shore of the lake was settled by t...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":13164,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Galilee","title_en":"Galilee","content_ro":"<h3>GALILEE<\/h3>\n<p>Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalBackground\">Historical Background<\/p>\n<p>In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in the hill country of Naphtali (Jos 20:7; cf. 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76).<\/p>\n<p>Galilee originally designated the area occupied by the tribes of Naphtali, Zebulun (Is 9:1), and possibly Asher (if Cabul in Jos 19:27 is the same city as in 1 Kgs 9:11-13). None of those tribes was able to completely expel the original Canaanite inhabitants (Jgs 1:30-33; 2:1-4), and as a result, Galilee tended to be racially mixed. The cities that King Solomon gave to Hiram, gentile king of Tyre, were within Galilee (1 Kgs 9:11), and the gentile intermixture in that area may have influenced Solomon’s choice of those cities for a gift. This racially mixed condition is also the probable basis for the designation in Isaiah 9:1, “Galilee of the nations” (cf. Mt 4:15; 1 Macc 5:15).<\/p>\n<p>During the monarchy, Galilee was a buffer zone between Israel and Syria, and it bore the brunt of Syrian invasions against Israel. This fact is cited by the prophet Isaiah (Is 9:1), but he saw it as the prelude to a brighter day when the messianic king would reign. Galilee was conquered by Syrian King Ben-hadad (1 Kgs 15:20) and was probably recovered by Israel’s King Ahab. Galilee was later subjugated by the Arameans under Hazael (2 Kgs 10:32; 12:18; 13:22) and regained by Jeroboam II (2 Kgs 14:23-25). As a result of Assyrian conquests in the area of Damascus and Galilee in 732 <span>BC<\/span> by Tiglath-pileser III (2 Kgs 15:29), more Gentiles were imported into the area while many of the Jewish inhabitants were deported. This naturally led to greater gentile influence and domination in Galilee. Under the successive influence of Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Syria, Galilee was constantly experiencing infiltration and migration. From the time of the Assyrian conquest of Israel to about the end of the second century <span>BC<\/span>, Galilee’s population was dominated by Gentiles, with only a few Jews.<\/p>\n<p>The Jews remaining in Galilee were brought to Judea by Simon Maccabeus in 164 <span>BC<\/span> (1 Macc 5:21-23). Galilee was conquered by Aristobulus I (104–103 <span>BC<\/span>), who forced the inhabitants to be circumcised and to submit to Jewish laws, a work that probably already had been initiated by John Hyrcanus (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n\n<p>Herod the Great (ruler under Rome, 37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) affixed Galilee to his kingdom, and more Jews were attracted there. Josephus recorded that Galilee had 240 cities and villages and 100,000 men available to fight against the Romans. After the death of Herod the Great, Galilee was included in the tetrarchy of Herod Antipas (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 39). With the banishment of Herod Antipas in <span>AD<\/span> 39, Galilee was added to the territory of Herod Agrippa I, who ruled it until he died in <span>AD<\/span> 44. Rome directly administered Galilee until it was put under the rule of Herod Agrippa II. By siding with the Romans during the Jewish revolts, he was able to retain his position until <span>AD<\/span> 100. In spite of the Galileans’ attempt to gain independence, the revolutionary faction was brought under subjection by Vespasian in <span>AD<\/span> 67. After Herod Agrippa II’s death, Galilee became part of the Roman province of Syria.<\/p>\n<p>Following the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sanhedrin and many other Jews of southern Palestine flocked to Galilee. As a result, such cities as Tiberias and Sepphoris became Jewish, and the dispersed Jews came to think of Galilee as their center. Tiberias became a center for Jewish learning, and it was there that such major contributions as the Tiberian system of vowel pointing the Hebrew consonantal text were made, as well as the formulation of the Mishnah and the Palestinian Talmud.<\/p>\n<p>From about <span>AD<\/span> 451 until the Muslim rule over Galilee began in the seventh century, Galilee was governed by the Christian patriarchate of Jerusalem, set up by the Council of Chalcedon in <span>AD<\/span> 451. Muslim rule from the seventh century on was continuous except for the intervals caused by the twelfth-century Crusades and World War I. All of Galilee has been included in the modern state of Israel since its establishment in 1948.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Boundaries\">Boundaries<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was bounded on the east by the upper Jordan River and the Sea of Galilee and on the south by the plain of Esdraelon, which served as a natural boundary between Galilee and Samaria. At times the plain was included in Galilee, as it was during the intertestamental period (1 Macc 10:30; 12:47-49). While the northern boundary was uncertain and variable during Galilee’s history, in NT times it reached to Lake Huleh. The western boundary followed the Mediterranean Sea to Mt Carmel.<\/p>\n<p>From the time of the divided kingdom until the Assyrian conquest of Galilee (734 <span>BC<\/span>), it was the northernmost part of the kingdom of Israel. The area was divided into upper Galilee and lower Galilee by the plain of Ramah, which ran between Capernaum and Ptolemais (cf. Jdt 1:8; 1 Macc 12:49; Josephus’s <em>War<\/em> 3.3.1). In the Mishnah (compilation of early rabbinical interpretation of the Law), Galilee is divided into three parts corresponding to the natural divisions of plain, hill country, and mountain. Under Roman rule, Galilee was about 25 to 30 miles (40 to 50 kilometers) from east to west and about 35 to 40 miles (55 to 65 kilometers) from north to south.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>The attractive Galilean landscape is made up of volcanic limestone hills and fertile alluvial plains. Its climate is cooler than that of any other part of Palestine, and its beauty and fertility contrast sharply with the barren, sun-baked hills of southern Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The physical features range from the high mountains in the north to the plain of Esdraelon in the south. Mt Tabor is prominent on the east, while Mt Carmel stands out on the west. Much of upper Galilee is 3,000 feet (914.4 meters) above sea level, and in NT times it was largely forested and less densely inhabited than lower Galilee. Lower Galilee starts at 1,500 to 2,000 feet (450 to 600 meters) above sea level and descends sharply to the Sea of Galilee, more than 600 feet (182.9 meters) below sea level.<\/p>\n<p>Besides the average annual rainfall of 25 inches (63.5 centimeters), Galilee is watered by the streams that flow from springs in the hills and are the main sources of the beautiful Kishon River at Janin, and the headwaters of the Jordan River, the largest river in Palestine. The ground is also moistened by heavy dews resulting from climatic conditions created by the Lebanon mountain range to the north.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cities\">Cities<\/p>\n<p>Among the more notable cities in Galilee’s early history were Kedesh in Naphtali, a city of refuge (Jos 20:7; 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76), and Hazor, about 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee (Jos 11:10; 1 Kgs 9:15). During the time of Christ, Chorazin (Mt 11:21) and Capernaum (4:13; 11:23) were prominent cities located in the northeast near the Sea of Galilee. Capernaum seems to have been a center for Jesus’ ministry in the area (Mt 4:13; Mk 2:1; 9:33; etc.). Nazareth is especially significant as the city of Christ’s childhood (Mt 2:22-23; Lk 2:39; 4:16; etc.). Nain (Lk 7:11-17), located on the northern edge of the mountain now called Little Hermon, and Cana of Galilee (Jn 2:1-11) also figured prominently in Christ’s ministry. Sepphoris and Tiberias were important cities during Roman administration.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RoadsandTravel\">Roads and Travel<\/p>\n<p>Many roads traversed Galilee, and those in NT times were superior due to Roman construction and maintenance.<\/p>\n<p>Among the best-known trade routes was the Via Maris (the Way of the Sea), which ran through Galilee on its way from Damascus to Egypt. Another main road ran from Tiberias, near the Sea of Galilee, to Acco (Ptolemais), a port on the Phoenician coast. Major caravan routes also connected Galilee with the markets of the East. The area was tied together by a network of spurs and connecting roads that branched from the main highways.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Inhabitants\">Inhabitants<\/p>\n<p>The occupants of Galilee (Galileans) were basically Jewish in religious and patriotic orientation, but they were composed of various ethnic elements. The influence of this mixture was sufficient to cause recognizable differences in speech from that of southern Palestine (cf. Mt 26:69, 73). The Galileans absorbed more Greek and Roman influences than did the Judean Jews. The racial mixture, differences in speech, and location caused Judean Jews to view Galilee and its inhabitants with contempt (Jn 1:46; 7:41, 52).<\/p>\n<p>Lower Galilee was densely settled with villages, and in NT times the population was probably about three million. The fertility of the soil and resultant fruitfulness of the country produced a prosperous Jewish populace, particularly in the centuries immediately after the time of Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Government\">Government<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was under the Roman rule of emperors Augustus and Tiberius during the time of Christ. Roman fortifications throughout Galilee were a constant reminder of the presence and influence of the Roman Empire. During Christ’s ministry, Rome installed the tetrarch Herod Antipas (Mt 14:1; Lk 23:5-7) to rule the territory. He was appointed to office when 17 years old. Sepphoris was his first capital; in about <span>AD<\/span> 22 he built Tiberias on the shore of the Sea of Galilee as his new capital, in honor of the emperor.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Products\">Products<\/p>\n<p>Abundant crops enabled Galilee to provide produce for the neighboring Phoenician cities of Tyre and Sidon around the middle of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Main crops included grapes, pomegranates, olives, and grains. Fishing in the Sea of Galilee was a prominent business in NT times (Mk 1:14-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusandGalilee\">Jesus and Galilee<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was raised in Galilee (Lk 4:16), and 11 of his 12 disciples were from there (Judas Iscariot was the only Judean).<\/p>\n<p>The culture, commerce, farming, and fishing business of the area formed the background for much of Jesus’ ministry, as his parables show (Mt 20:1-8; 21:33; Mk 4:3; Lk 13:6-9). The first three Gospels are largely occupied with Christ’s ministry in Galilee, with much of it being spent around the Sea of Galilee. Most of his parables (19 of 32) were spoken here, and the vast majority of his miracles (25 of 33) were performed in Galilee. Jesus received his greatest response in this region. The Sermon on the Mount was spoken in Galilee, and one of its mountains was the scene of the Lord’s transfiguration. Many of the women who followed Christ and ministered to him also came from there (Mt 27:55). Two of Christ’s most significant postresurrection appearances took place in Galilee (Mt 28:16-20; Jn 21:1-23), and one of Christ’s own titles, Jesus of Nazareth (Jn 1:45), identified him as a Galilean.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Galileans\">Galileans<\/p>\n<p>Since Jesus and most of the 12 disciples were from Galilee, it was natural for the term to be applied to all of his followers, especially since it implied that the movement was not as pure as Judean Judaism. Some interpreters believe that Luke 22:59 is an example of the use of “Galilean” as a title; in Acts 1:11 and 2:7 it is merely a geographical reference. One sure reference to Christians by that title appears in the work of the pagan philosopher Epictetus (<span>AD<\/span> 50?–135?), who was impressed with how Christians died for their faith. It is not clear how common the title of Galilean was, but it had obviously spread from Judea to Rome, where Epictetus lived.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Palestine; Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GALILEE<\/h3>\n<p>Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalBackground\">Historical Background<\/p>\n<p>In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in the hill country of Naphtali (Jos 20:7; cf. 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76).<\/p>\n<p>Galilee originally designated the area occupied by the tribes of Naphtali, Zebulun (Is 9:1), and possibly Asher (if Cabul in Jos 19:27 is the same city as in 1 Kgs 9:11-13). None of those tribes was able to completely expel the original Canaanite inhabitants (Jgs 1:30-33; 2:1-4), and as a result, Galilee tended to be racially mixed. The cities that King Solomon gave to Hiram, gentile king of Tyre, were within Galilee (1 Kgs 9:11), and the gentile intermixture in that area may have influenced Solomon’s choice of those cities for a gift. This racially mixed condition is also the probable basis for the designation in Isaiah 9:1, “Galilee of the nations” (cf. Mt 4:15; 1 Macc 5:15).<\/p>\n<p>During the monarchy, Galilee was a buffer zone between Israel and Syria, and it bore the brunt of Syrian invasions against Israel. This fact is cited by the prophet Isaiah (Is 9:1), but he saw it as the prelude to a brighter day when the messianic king would reign. Galilee was conquered by Syrian King Ben-hadad (1 Kgs 15:20) and was probably recovered by Israel’s King Ahab. Galilee was later subjugated by the Arameans under Hazael (2 Kgs 10:32; 12:18; 13:22) and regained by Jeroboam II (2 Kgs 14:23-25). As a result of Assyrian conquests in the area of Damascus and Galilee in 732 <span>BC<\/span> by Tiglath-pileser III (2 Kgs 15:29), more Gentiles were imported into the area while many of the Jewish inhabitants were deported. This naturally led to greater gentile influence and domination in Galilee. Under the successive influence of Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Syria, Galilee was constantly experiencing infiltration and migration. From the time of the Assyrian conquest of Israel to about the end of the second century <span>BC<\/span>, Galilee’s population was dominated by Gentiles, with only a few Jews.<\/p>\n<p>The Jews remaining in Galilee were brought to Judea by Simon Maccabeus in 164 <span>BC<\/span> (1 Macc 5:21-23). Galilee was conquered by Aristobulus I (104–103 <span>BC<\/span>), who forced the inhabitants to be circumcised and to submit to Jewish laws, a work that probably already had been initiated by John Hyrcanus (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n\n<p>Herod the Great (ruler under Rome, 37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) affixed Galilee to his kingdom, and more Jews were attracted there. Josephus recorded that Galilee had 240 cities and villages and 100,000 men available to fight against the Romans. After the death of Herod the Great, Galilee was included in the tetrarchy of Herod Antipas (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 39). With the banishment of Herod Antipas in <span>AD<\/span> 39, Galilee was added to the territory of Herod Agrippa I, who ruled it until he died in <span>AD<\/span> 44. Rome directly administered Galilee until it was put under the rule of Herod Agrippa II. By siding with the Romans during the Jewish revolts, he was able to retain his position until <span>AD<\/span> 100. In spite of the Galileans’ attempt to gain independence, the revolutionary faction was brought under subjection by Vespasian in <span>AD<\/span> 67. After Herod Agrippa II’s death, Galilee became part of the Roman province of Syria.<\/p>\n<p>Following the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sanhedrin and many other Jews of southern Palestine flocked to Galilee. As a result, such cities as Tiberias and Sepphoris became Jewish, and the dispersed Jews came to think of Galilee as their center. Tiberias became a center for Jewish learning, and it was there that such major contributions as the Tiberian system of vowel pointing the Hebrew consonantal text were made, as well as the formulation of the Mishnah and the Palestinian Talmud.<\/p>\n<p>From about <span>AD<\/span> 451 until the Muslim rule over Galilee began in the seventh century, Galilee was governed by the Christian patriarchate of Jerusalem, set up by the Council of Chalcedon in <span>AD<\/span> 451. Muslim rule from the seventh century on was continuous except for the intervals caused by the twelfth-century Crusades and World War I. All of Galilee has been included in the modern state of Israel since its establishment in 1948.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Boundaries\">Boundaries<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was bounded on the east by the upper Jordan River and the Sea of Galilee and on the south by the plain of Esdraelon, which served as a natural boundary between Galilee and Samaria. At times the plain was included in Galilee, as it was during the intertestamental period (1 Macc 10:30; 12:47-49). While the northern boundary was uncertain and variable during Galilee’s history, in NT times it reached to Lake Huleh. The western boundary followed the Mediterranean Sea to Mt Carmel.<\/p>\n<p>From the time of the divided kingdom until the Assyrian conquest of Galilee (734 <span>BC<\/span>), it was the northernmost part of the kingdom of Israel. The area was divided into upper Galilee and lower Galilee by the plain of Ramah, which ran between Capernaum and Ptolemais (cf. Jdt 1:8; 1 Macc 12:49; Josephus’s <em>War<\/em> 3.3.1). In the Mishnah (compilation of early rabbinical interpretation of the Law), Galilee is divided into three parts corresponding to the natural divisions of plain, hill country, and mountain. Under Roman rule, Galilee was about 25 to 30 miles (40 to 50 kilometers) from east to west and about 35 to 40 miles (55 to 65 kilometers) from north to south.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>The attractive Galilean landscape is made up of volcanic limestone hills and fertile alluvial plains. Its climate is cooler than that of any other part of Palestine, and its beauty and fertility contrast sharply with the barren, sun-baked hills of southern Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The physical features range from the high mountains in the north to the plain of Esdraelon in the south. Mt Tabor is prominent on the east, while Mt Carmel stands out on the west. Much of upper Galilee is 3,000 feet (914.4 meters) above sea level, and in NT times it was largely forested and less densely inhabited than lower Galilee. Lower Galilee starts at 1,500 to 2,000 feet (450 to 600 meters) above sea level and descends sharply to the Sea of Galilee, more than 600 feet (182.9 meters) below sea level.<\/p>\n<p>Besides the average annual rainfall of 25 inches (63.5 centimeters), Galilee is watered by the streams that flow from springs in the hills and are the main sources of the beautiful Kishon River at Janin, and the headwaters of the Jordan River, the largest river in Palestine. The ground is also moistened by heavy dews resulting from climatic conditions created by the Lebanon mountain range to the north.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cities\">Cities<\/p>\n<p>Among the more notable cities in Galilee’s early history were Kedesh in Naphtali, a city of refuge (Jos 20:7; 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76), and Hazor, about 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee (Jos 11:10; 1 Kgs 9:15). During the time of Christ, Chorazin (Mt 11:21) and Capernaum (4:13; 11:23) were prominent cities located in the northeast near the Sea of Galilee. Capernaum seems to have been a center for Jesus’ ministry in the area (Mt 4:13; Mk 2:1; 9:33; etc.). Nazareth is especially significant as the city of Christ’s childhood (Mt 2:22-23; Lk 2:39; 4:16; etc.). Nain (Lk 7:11-17), located on the northern edge of the mountain now called Little Hermon, and Cana of Galilee (Jn 2:1-11) also figured prominently in Christ’s ministry. Sepphoris and Tiberias were important cities during Roman administration.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RoadsandTravel\">Roads and Travel<\/p>\n<p>Many roads traversed Galilee, and those in NT times were superior due to Roman construction and maintenance.<\/p>\n<p>Among the best-known trade routes was the Via Maris (the Way of the Sea), which ran through Galilee on its way from Damascus to Egypt. Another main road ran from Tiberias, near the Sea of Galilee, to Acco (Ptolemais), a port on the Phoenician coast. Major caravan routes also connected Galilee with the markets of the East. The area was tied together by a network of spurs and connecting roads that branched from the main highways.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Inhabitants\">Inhabitants<\/p>\n<p>The occupants of Galilee (Galileans) were basically Jewish in religious and patriotic orientation, but they were composed of various ethnic elements. The influence of this mixture was sufficient to cause recognizable differences in speech from that of southern Palestine (cf. Mt 26:69, 73). The Galileans absorbed more Greek and Roman influences than did the Judean Jews. The racial mixture, differences in speech, and location caused Judean Jews to view Galilee and its inhabitants with contempt (Jn 1:46; 7:41, 52).<\/p>\n<p>Lower Galilee was densely settled with villages, and in NT times the population was probably about three million. The fertility of the soil and resultant fruitfulness of the country produced a prosperous Jewish populace, particularly in the centuries immediately after the time of Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Government\">Government<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was under the Roman rule of emperors Augustus and Tiberius during the time of Christ. Roman fortifications throughout Galilee were a constant reminder of the presence and influence of the Roman Empire. During Christ’s ministry, Rome installed the tetrarch Herod Antipas (Mt 14:1; Lk 23:5-7) to rule the territory. He was appointed to office when 17 years old. Sepphoris was his first capital; in about <span>AD<\/span> 22 he built Tiberias on the shore of the Sea of Galilee as his new capital, in honor of the emperor.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Products\">Products<\/p>\n<p>Abundant crops enabled Galilee to provide produce for the neighboring Phoenician cities of Tyre and Sidon around the middle of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Main crops included grapes, pomegranates, olives, and grains. Fishing in the Sea of Galilee was a prominent business in NT times (Mk 1:14-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusandGalilee\">Jesus and Galilee<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was raised in Galilee (Lk 4:16), and 11 of his 12 disciples were from there (Judas Iscariot was the only Judean).<\/p>\n<p>The culture, commerce, farming, and fishing business of the area formed the background for much of Jesus’ ministry, as his parables show (Mt 20:1-8; 21:33; Mk 4:3; Lk 13:6-9). The first three Gospels are largely occupied with Christ’s ministry in Galilee, with much of it being spent around the Sea of Galilee. Most of his parables (19 of 32) were spoken here, and the vast majority of his miracles (25 of 33) were performed in Galilee. Jesus received his greatest response in this region. The Sermon on the Mount was spoken in Galilee, and one of its mountains was the scene of the Lord’s transfiguration. Many of the women who followed Christ and ministered to him also came from there (Mt 27:55). Two of Christ’s most significant postresurrection appearances took place in Galilee (Mt 28:16-20; Jn 21:1-23), and one of Christ’s own titles, Jesus of Nazareth (Jn 1:45), identified him as a Galilean.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Galileans\">Galileans<\/p>\n<p>Since Jesus and most of the 12 disciples were from Galilee, it was natural for the term to be applied to all of his followers, especially since it implied that the movement was not as pure as Judean Judaism. Some interpreters believe that Luke 22:59 is an example of the use of “Galilean” as a title; in Acts 1:11 and 2:7 it is merely a geographical reference. One sure reference to Christians by that title appears in the work of the pagan philosopher Epictetus (<span>AD<\/span> 50?–135?), who was impressed with how Christians died for their faith. It is not clear how common the title of Galilean was, but it had obviously spread from Judea to Rome, where Epictetus lived.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Palestine; Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GALILEE Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.” Historical Background In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in...","summary_en":"GALILEE Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.” Historical Background In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14963,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Hades*","title_en":"Hades*","content_ro":"<h3>HADES*<\/h3>\n<p>Abode of the dead. In Greek mythology Hades was originally the god of the underworld (also named Pluto), a brother of Zeus. He was the abductor of Persephone and thus the cause of winter. His realm, which was called by his name (and also called Tartarus), was the dark land where the dead existed. Odysseus entered that realm and fed the ghosts with blood to get directions back home (Homer’s <em>Odyssey<\/em> 4.834). Originally the Greeks thought of hades as simply the grave—a shadowy, ghostlike existence that happened to all who died, good and evil alike. Gradually they and the Romans came to see it as a place of reward and punishment, an elaborately organized and guarded realm where the good were rewarded in the Elysian Fields and the evil were punished (so described by the Roman poet Virgil, 70–19 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>“Hades” became important to the Jews as the typical term used by the translators of the Septuagint to render the Hebrew name “Sheol” into Greek. This was a very suitable translation for the Hebrew term, for both words can signify the physical grave or death (Gn 37:35; Prv 5:5; 7:27), and both originally referred to a dark underworld (Jb 10:21-22) where existence was at best shadowy (Jb 38:17; Is 14:9). Sheol is described as under the ocean (Jb 26:5-6; Jon 2:2-3) and as having bars and gates (Jb 17:16). All people go there whether they are good or evil (Ps 89:48). In the earlier literature there is no hope of release from Sheol\/hades. C. S. Lewis describes this concept well in <em>The Silver Chair:<\/em> “Many sink down, and few return to the sunlit lands.” Of course, all these descriptions are in poetic literature; how literally the Hebrews (or the Greeks, for that matter) took their descriptions of hades\/Sheol is hard to say. They may have simply used the older picture-language of Greek poetry to describe that for which prose words were inadequate.<\/p>\n<p>Jew and Greek alike came in contact with Persia—the Jews at the time the postexilic writers were composing their books (e.g., Malachi, Daniel, and some psalms), and the Greeks somewhat later (they fought the Persians 520–479 <span>BC<\/span> and conquered them 334–330 <span>BC<\/span>). Whether because of Persian influence on these groups or not, during this period, the idea of reward and punishment after death developed, and Sheol\/hades changed from a shadow land to a differentiated place of reward and punishment for both Greeks (and Romans) and Jews. Josephus records that the Pharisees believed in reward and punishment at death (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.3), and a similar idea appears in 1 Enoch 22. In these and many other cases in Jewish literature, hades stands for the one place of the dead, which has two or more compartments. In other Jewish literature, hades is the place of torment for the wicked, while the righteous enter paradise (Pss of Sol 14; Wisd of Sol 2:1; 3:1). Thus, by the beginning of the NT period, hades has three meanings: (1) death, (2) the place of all the dead, and (3) the place of the wicked dead only. Context determines which meaning an author intends in a given passage.<\/p>\n<p>All these meanings appear in the NT. In Matthew 11:23 and Luke 10:15, Jesus speaks of Capernaum’s descending to hades (<span>nlt<\/span> mg). Most likely he simply means that the city will “die” or be destroyed. “Hades” means “death” in this context, as “heaven” means “exaltation.” Revelation 6:8 also exemplifies this: Death comes on a horse, and hades (a symbol of death) comes close behind. This personification of hades probably comes from the OT, where hades\/Sheol is viewed as a monster that devours people (Prv 1:12; 27:20; 30:16; Is 5:14; 28:15, 18; Hb 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 16:18 is a more difficult use of hades. The church will be built upon a rock and the gates of hades will not prevail against it. Here the place of the dead (complete with gates and bars) is a symbol for death: Christians may in fact be killed, but death (the gates of hades) will no more hold them than it held Christ. He who burst out of hades will bring his people out as well. This is also the meaning of Acts 2:27 (quoting Ps 16:10): Christ did not stay dead; his life did not remain in hades; unlike David, he rose from the dead. It is uncertain in either of these cases whether hades is simply a symbol for death or whether it means that Christ and the Christian actually went to a place of the dead called hades; probably the former is intended. Whatever the case, since Christ did rise, he has conquered death and hades. He appears in Revelation 1:18 as the one holding the keys (the control) to both.<\/p>\n<p>Two NT passages refer to hades as the place where the dead exist: Revelation 20:13-14 and Luke 16:23. In Revelation 20 hades is emptied of all who are in it (either all dead or the wicked dead, depending on one’s eschatology)—the resurrection is complete. When the wicked are judged and cast into the lake of fire (Gehenna), hades is also thrown in. Luke 16:23, however, clearly refers to hades as the place of the wicked dead. There the rich man is tormented in a flame, while the poor man, Lazarus, goes to paradise (Abraham’s bosom).<\/p>\n<p>Hades, then, means three things in the NT, as it did in Jewish literature: (1) Death and its power is the most frequent meaning, especially in metaphorical uses. (2) It also means the place of the dead in general, when a writer wants to lump all the dead together. (3) It means, finally, the place where the wicked dead are tormented before the final judgment. This is its narrowest meaning, occurring only once in the NT (Lk 16:23). The Bible does not dwell on this torment—Dante’s picture in <em>The Inferno<\/em> draws on later speculation and Greco-Roman conceptions of hades more than on the Bible.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dead, Place of the; Gehenna; Hell; Sheol.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HADES*<\/h3>\n<p>Abode of the dead. In Greek mythology Hades was originally the god of the underworld (also named Pluto), a brother of Zeus. He was the abductor of Persephone and thus the cause of winter. His realm, which was called by his name (and also called Tartarus), was the dark land where the dead existed. Odysseus entered that realm and fed the ghosts with blood to get directions back home (Homer’s <em>Odyssey<\/em> 4.834). Originally the Greeks thought of hades as simply the grave—a shadowy, ghostlike existence that happened to all who died, good and evil alike. Gradually they and the Romans came to see it as a place of reward and punishment, an elaborately organized and guarded realm where the good were rewarded in the Elysian Fields and the evil were punished (so described by the Roman poet Virgil, 70–19 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>“Hades” became important to the Jews as the typical term used by the translators of the Septuagint to render the Hebrew name “Sheol” into Greek. This was a very suitable translation for the Hebrew term, for both words can signify the physical grave or death (Gn 37:35; Prv 5:5; 7:27), and both originally referred to a dark underworld (Jb 10:21-22) where existence was at best shadowy (Jb 38:17; Is 14:9). Sheol is described as under the ocean (Jb 26:5-6; Jon 2:2-3) and as having bars and gates (Jb 17:16). All people go there whether they are good or evil (Ps 89:48). In the earlier literature there is no hope of release from Sheol\/hades. C. S. Lewis describes this concept well in <em>The Silver Chair:<\/em> “Many sink down, and few return to the sunlit lands.” Of course, all these descriptions are in poetic literature; how literally the Hebrews (or the Greeks, for that matter) took their descriptions of hades\/Sheol is hard to say. They may have simply used the older picture-language of Greek poetry to describe that for which prose words were inadequate.<\/p>\n<p>Jew and Greek alike came in contact with Persia—the Jews at the time the postexilic writers were composing their books (e.g., Malachi, Daniel, and some psalms), and the Greeks somewhat later (they fought the Persians 520–479 <span>BC<\/span> and conquered them 334–330 <span>BC<\/span>). Whether because of Persian influence on these groups or not, during this period, the idea of reward and punishment after death developed, and Sheol\/hades changed from a shadow land to a differentiated place of reward and punishment for both Greeks (and Romans) and Jews. Josephus records that the Pharisees believed in reward and punishment at death (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.3), and a similar idea appears in 1 Enoch 22. In these and many other cases in Jewish literature, hades stands for the one place of the dead, which has two or more compartments. In other Jewish literature, hades is the place of torment for the wicked, while the righteous enter paradise (Pss of Sol 14; Wisd of Sol 2:1; 3:1). Thus, by the beginning of the NT period, hades has three meanings: (1) death, (2) the place of all the dead, and (3) the place of the wicked dead only. Context determines which meaning an author intends in a given passage.<\/p>\n<p>All these meanings appear in the NT. In Matthew 11:23 and Luke 10:15, Jesus speaks of Capernaum’s descending to hades (<span>nlt<\/span> mg). Most likely he simply means that the city will “die” or be destroyed. “Hades” means “death” in this context, as “heaven” means “exaltation.” Revelation 6:8 also exemplifies this: Death comes on a horse, and hades (a symbol of death) comes close behind. This personification of hades probably comes from the OT, where hades\/Sheol is viewed as a monster that devours people (Prv 1:12; 27:20; 30:16; Is 5:14; 28:15, 18; Hb 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 16:18 is a more difficult use of hades. The church will be built upon a rock and the gates of hades will not prevail against it. Here the place of the dead (complete with gates and bars) is a symbol for death: Christians may in fact be killed, but death (the gates of hades) will no more hold them than it held Christ. He who burst out of hades will bring his people out as well. This is also the meaning of Acts 2:27 (quoting Ps 16:10): Christ did not stay dead; his life did not remain in hades; unlike David, he rose from the dead. It is uncertain in either of these cases whether hades is simply a symbol for death or whether it means that Christ and the Christian actually went to a place of the dead called hades; probably the former is intended. Whatever the case, since Christ did rise, he has conquered death and hades. He appears in Revelation 1:18 as the one holding the keys (the control) to both.<\/p>\n<p>Two NT passages refer to hades as the place where the dead exist: Revelation 20:13-14 and Luke 16:23. In Revelation 20 hades is emptied of all who are in it (either all dead or the wicked dead, depending on one’s eschatology)—the resurrection is complete. When the wicked are judged and cast into the lake of fire (Gehenna), hades is also thrown in. Luke 16:23, however, clearly refers to hades as the place of the wicked dead. There the rich man is tormented in a flame, while the poor man, Lazarus, goes to paradise (Abraham’s bosom).<\/p>\n<p>Hades, then, means three things in the NT, as it did in Jewish literature: (1) Death and its power is the most frequent meaning, especially in metaphorical uses. (2) It also means the place of the dead in general, when a writer wants to lump all the dead together. (3) It means, finally, the place where the wicked dead are tormented before the final judgment. This is its narrowest meaning, occurring only once in the NT (Lk 16:23). The Bible does not dwell on this torment—Dante’s picture in <em>The Inferno<\/em> draws on later speculation and Greco-Roman conceptions of hades more than on the Bible.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dead, Place of the; Gehenna; Hell; Sheol.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HADES* Abode of the dead. In Greek mythology Hades was originally the god of the underworld (also named Pluto), a brother of Zeus. He was the abductor of Persephone and thus the cause of winter. His realm, which was called by his name (and also called Tartarus), was the dark land where the dead existed. Odysseus entered that realm and fed the ghosts with blood to get directions back home (Homer’s Odyssey 4.834). Originally the Greeks thought of hades as simply the grave—a shadowy, ghostlike e...","summary_en":"HADES* Abode of the dead. In Greek mythology Hades was originally the god of the underworld (also named Pluto), a brother of Zeus. He was the abductor of Persephone and thus the cause of winter. His realm, which was called by his name (and also called Tartarus), was the dark land where the dead existed. Odysseus entered that realm and fed the ghosts with blood to get directions back home (Homer’s Odyssey 4.834). Originally the Greeks thought of hades as simply the grave—a shadowy, ghostlike e...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34201,"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":54705,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:23","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:23<\/strong> <em>the place of the dead:<\/em> Greek <em>Hades,<\/em> which corresponds to the Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Sheol<\/span> (see study note on Ps 6:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:23<\/strong> <em>the place of the dead:<\/em> Greek <em>Hades,<\/em> which corresponds to the Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Sheol<\/span> (see study note on Ps 6:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:23 the place of the dead: Greek Hades, which corresponds to the Hebrew term Sheol (see study note on Ps 6:5).","summary_en":"11:23 the place of the dead: Greek Hades, which corresponds to the Hebrew term Sheol (see study note on Ps 6:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82331,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:23","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:23<\/strong> <em>the place of the dead:<\/em> Greek <em>Hades,<\/em> which corresponds to the Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Sheol<\/span> (see study note on Ps 6:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:23<\/strong> <em>the place of the dead:<\/em> Greek <em>Hades,<\/em> which corresponds to the Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Sheol<\/span> (see study note on Ps 6:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:23 the place of the dead: Greek Hades, which corresponds to the Hebrew term Sheol (see study note on Ps 6:5).","summary_en":"11:23 the place of the dead: Greek Hades, which corresponds to the Hebrew term Sheol (see study note on Ps 6:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":109957,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:23","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:23<\/strong> <em>the place of the dead:<\/em> Greek <em>Hades,<\/em> which corresponds to the Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Sheol<\/span> (see study note on Ps 6:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:23<\/strong> <em>the place of the dead:<\/em> Greek <em>Hades,<\/em> which corresponds to the Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Sheol<\/span> (see study note on Ps 6:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:23 the place of the dead: Greek Hades, which corresponds to the Hebrew term Sheol (see study note on Ps 6:5).","summary_en":"11:23 the place of the dead: Greek Hades, which corresponds to the Hebrew term Sheol (see study note on Ps 6:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137583,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:23","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:23<\/strong> <em>the place of the dead:<\/em> Greek <em>Hades,<\/em> which corresponds to the Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Sheol<\/span> (see study note on Ps 6:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:23<\/strong> <em>the place of the dead:<\/em> Greek <em>Hades,<\/em> which corresponds to the Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Sheol<\/span> (see study note on Ps 6:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:23 the place of the dead: Greek Hades, which corresponds to the Hebrew term Sheol (see study note on Ps 6:5).","summary_en":"11:23 the place of the dead: Greek Hades, which corresponds to the Hebrew term Sheol (see study note on Ps 6:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"25":[{"id":635,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Adoption","title_en":"Adoption","content_ro":"<h3>ADOPTION<\/h3>\n<p>Theologically, the act of God by which believers become members of “God’s family” with all the privileges and obligations of family membership. “Sons of God,” a common <span>kjv<\/span> expression, includes individuals of both sexes numbered among God’s children (Is 43:6; 2 Cor 6:18).<\/p>\n<p>According to the NT, all persons are sinners by nature, and hence are called “children of wrath” (Eph 2:3, <span>kjv<\/span>); however, those upon whom God bestows his love become “children of God” by grace (1 Jn 3:1). The adoption through which this happens has its origin in God’s love and its foundation in Jesus Christ who is uniquely the Son of God. Theologians regard the term “Son of God” as referring preeminently to Christ’s deity (Mt 11:25-27; 16:16-17), for he is one in substance and glory with the Father. As the second person of the Trinity, Christ is distinguished from the Father as “the only begotten Son.” Believers in Christ, although “adopted,” are never seen as on a par with the uncreated, divine Son.<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, in the beloved Son, sinners have been loved and predestined by God the Father to become his children by adoption (Eph 1:4-6). That adoption is secured by Christ the Redeemer; through his death and resurrection he destroyed sin and its death penalty, restoring the righteousness and life requisite for the status of sonship. Christ is the head of the “new covenant” as its mediator and guarantor. His brothers and sisters, as its beneficiaries, become God’s heirs, and his joint heirs (Rom 8:17). God gives to them the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of his Son, as the Spirit of adoption (Rom 8:15; Gal 4:6). The indwelling Spirit gives believers assurance that they are indeed God’s children and enables them to cry out to God as Father (Rom 8:15-16). Such intimacy with the Creator and Savior in prayer is one privilege of adoption.<\/p>\n<p>Adoption was a privilege given to God’s people under the “old covenant” (Rom 9:4). Both Israel as a whole and individual Israelites knew God as Father (Is 64:8-9; Hos 11:1). Since the NT regards adoption as ultimately possible only through Jesus Christ, Israel’s adoption before the Incarnation was an under-age sonship comparable to the status of servanthood (Gal 4:1-7). In Jesus the privilege of mature sonship was extended to include both Jews and Gentiles (Gal 3:25-29). Though adoption is a benefit enjoyed in the present experience of God’s people (1 Jn 3:1), its full extent is realized only at their resurrection from the dead (Rom 8:21-23).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ADOPTION<\/h3>\n<p>Theologically, the act of God by which believers become members of “God’s family” with all the privileges and obligations of family membership. “Sons of God,” a common <span>kjv<\/span> expression, includes individuals of both sexes numbered among God’s children (Is 43:6; 2 Cor 6:18).<\/p>\n<p>According to the NT, all persons are sinners by nature, and hence are called “children of wrath” (Eph 2:3, <span>kjv<\/span>); however, those upon whom God bestows his love become “children of God” by grace (1 Jn 3:1). The adoption through which this happens has its origin in God’s love and its foundation in Jesus Christ who is uniquely the Son of God. Theologians regard the term “Son of God” as referring preeminently to Christ’s deity (Mt 11:25-27; 16:16-17), for he is one in substance and glory with the Father. As the second person of the Trinity, Christ is distinguished from the Father as “the only begotten Son.” Believers in Christ, although “adopted,” are never seen as on a par with the uncreated, divine Son.<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, in the beloved Son, sinners have been loved and predestined by God the Father to become his children by adoption (Eph 1:4-6). That adoption is secured by Christ the Redeemer; through his death and resurrection he destroyed sin and its death penalty, restoring the righteousness and life requisite for the status of sonship. Christ is the head of the “new covenant” as its mediator and guarantor. His brothers and sisters, as its beneficiaries, become God’s heirs, and his joint heirs (Rom 8:17). God gives to them the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of his Son, as the Spirit of adoption (Rom 8:15; Gal 4:6). The indwelling Spirit gives believers assurance that they are indeed God’s children and enables them to cry out to God as Father (Rom 8:15-16). Such intimacy with the Creator and Savior in prayer is one privilege of adoption.<\/p>\n<p>Adoption was a privilege given to God’s people under the “old covenant” (Rom 9:4). Both Israel as a whole and individual Israelites knew God as Father (Is 64:8-9; Hos 11:1). Since the NT regards adoption as ultimately possible only through Jesus Christ, Israel’s adoption before the Incarnation was an under-age sonship comparable to the status of servanthood (Gal 4:1-7). In Jesus the privilege of mature sonship was extended to include both Jews and Gentiles (Gal 3:25-29). Though adoption is a benefit enjoyed in the present experience of God’s people (1 Jn 3:1), its full extent is realized only at their resurrection from the dead (Rom 8:21-23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"ADOPTION Theologically, the act of God by which believers become members of “God’s family” with all the privileges and obligations of family membership. “Sons of God,” a common kjv expression, includes individuals of both sexes numbered among God’s children (Is 43:6; 2 Cor 6:18). According to the NT, all persons are sinners by nature, and hence are called “children of wrath” (Eph 2:3, kjv); however, those upon whom God bestows his love become “children of God” by grace (1 Jn 3:1). The adoptio...","summary_en":"ADOPTION Theologically, the act of God by which believers become members of “God’s family” with all the privileges and obligations of family membership. “Sons of God,” a common kjv expression, includes individuals of both sexes numbered among God’s children (Is 43:6; 2 Cor 6:18). According to the NT, all persons are sinners by nature, and hence are called “children of wrath” (Eph 2:3, kjv); however, those upon whom God bestows his love become “children of God” by grace (1 Jn 3:1). The adoptio...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14099,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Being and Attributes of God","title_en":"Being and Attributes of God","content_ro":"<h3>GOD, Being and Attributes of<\/h3>\n<p>Inherent characteristics of God revealed in Scripture and displayed in God’s actions in biblical history. They are characteristics equally of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God’s attributes are revealed in progressively richer and fuller ways within the history of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>According to the Bible, the entire creation shows God’s deity and eternal power (Ps 19:1-6; Rom 1:20). God’s providence also reveals certain of his attributes (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:35; Acts 14:16-17; 17:22-31). The fullest revelation of God’s attributes is seen in his work of redemption through Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>How does Scripture express the characteristics of God? First, in the divine names by which God revealed himself (Gn 1:1; 2:4; 17:1; Ex 3:6, 14-15; 6:2-5). Some of God’s attributes are revealed implicitly in the biblical accounts of Creation, fall, Flood, Babel, and the exodus, and more fully in the various covenants God made with his people. To Israel, he identified himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Ex 3:15). To the pharaoh, he identified himself as the “God of Israel” or the “God of the Hebrews” (5:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>By the time the people of Israel had reached Mt Sinai, the revelation of God’s attributes in the biblical narrative had become more explicit: “The <span>Lord<\/span>, the <span>Lord<\/span>, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and the children’s children, to the third and the fourth generation” (Ex 34:6-7, <span>rsv<\/span>). This summary is repeated elsewhere with slight variations (Nm 14:18; Neh 9:17; Ps 103:8; Jer 32:18; Jon 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Attributes of God<\/p>\n<p>• Incommunicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>• Communicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAttributesofGod\">The Attributes of God<\/p>\n<p>The historic Christian confessions refer to various characteristics of God without calling them attributes or classifying them. The Westminster Shorter Catechism (1647) shows a tendency toward classification, describing God as “a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth.” The first four attributes qualify the others.<\/p>\n<p>Several ways of classifying the attributes have been suggested. Generally such schemes divide the divine attributes into pairs: negative and positive, natural and moral, absolute and relative, immanent and eminent, intransitive and transitive, quiescent and operative, antithetical and synthetical, or incommunicable and communicable. Roman Catholics prefer the distinction of negative and positive, or natural and moral. Lutherans generally favor the distinction between quiescent and operative attributes. Reformed and evangelical scholars usually distinguish incommunicable and communicable attributes. Karl Barth grouped the attributes under freedom and love, and then proposed pairs of attributes that reflect freedom-love or love-freedom. In spite of the diversity of labels given the groups of attributes, surprising agreement exists in the attributes listed under each group.<\/p>\n<p>This article will make a distinction between incommunicable and communicable attributes without considering the classification itself as significant. No classification of God’s attributes is fully satisfactory. The <em>incommunicable<\/em> attributes emphasize the absolute distinctness of God, his transcendent greatness and exalted nature. Such attributes have little or no analogy in God’s creatures. The <em>communicable<\/em> attributes find some reflection or analogy in human beings created in God’s image. They indicate the immanence of God in relation to creatures. Yet all the attributes are God’s attributes; the distinction between God and man, between Creator and creature, is always basic.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IncommunicableAttributes\">Incommunicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>Acknowledging some diversity of theological opinion, the following attributes will be considered incommunicable: unity, spirituality, independence, immutability, eternity, and immensity. In addition, the incomprehensibility of God must be mentioned.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>incomprehensibility<\/em> is sometimes included in lists of his attributes. It seems preferable to regard it as a description of human inability to understand God fully. Incomprehensibility is therefore not an attribute, although it is a given in every discussion of God. Through his revelation God is truly known by faith, yet no creature will ever comprehend God the Creator. Likewise, no one will ever fully understand any one of God’s attributes. Acknowledgment of God’s incomprehensibility should contribute to a spirit of humility in every consideration of God and his attributes (Pss 139:6; 145:3; Is 40:28; 55:8-9; Mt 11:25-27; Rom 11:33-36; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 13:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>unity<\/em> is an expression of monotheism—the fact that the God of Scripture is the only, living, true God (Dt 6:4; Mk 12:29; Jn 17:3). All other gods are idols and figments of human imagination. This attribute is reflected in the first commandment: “You shall have no other gods before me” (Ex 20:3).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>spirituality<\/em> indicates that God is not physical and is invisible. Positively it means that God is personal, living, self-conscious, and self-determining. The invisible God cannot be seen by human eyes (Ex 33:20), so the second commandment forbids every visible representation of God (20:4). Because God is Spirit, he must be worshiped in spirit and in truth (Jn 4:24).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>independence<\/em> or self-existence indicates that he is not dependent upon anything outside himself. He is self-sufficient in his existence, in his decrees, and in all his works. God has “life in himself” (Jn 5:26) and “he himself gives life and breath and everything” (Acts 17:25). To Israel, he revealed himself as the “<span>I Am<\/span>” (Ex 3:14), and he made Israel a covenant people for his own possession. God continues to work out his will in the world, and even though he uses various means, his independence remains intact. Thus, he enters into fellowship with his covenant people, and he publishes the gospel through human agents.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>immutability<\/em> or constancy expresses his changelessness and his faithfulness to himself, to his decrees, promises, and works. He remains forever the same true God who undergoes no change from within or from anything outside himself. And so in James 1:17 we read: “Every good endowment and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change” (<span>rsv<\/span>). God’s oath to Abraham expressed his immutability so that his covenant people could be sure of the “unchangeable character of his purpose” (Heb 6:17). Samuel told King Saul that the Lord would not “change his mind; for he is not a man” (1 Sm 15:29, <span>niv<\/span>; cf. Nm 23:19). “For I the <span>Lord<\/span> do not change” (Mal 3:6). That was God’s explanation for not destroying sinful Judah; he shows mercy and keeps his covenant. Because “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever,” Christians are warned not to be “led by diverse and strange teachings” (Heb 13:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>God’s immutability or constancy does not imply that he is static or immobile. He is a dynamic, living God who is constantly working (Jn 5:17). Sometimes God is described as being sorry, repenting, or changing his mind (Gn 6:6-7; 1 Sm 15:11; Jon 3:10). In their contexts, such figurative expressions show the constancy of a God who, in holiness and righteousness, always abhors sin and reacts against it. In his grace and mercy, he forgives the penitent, and he carries out his promises without fail (Ps 110:4; Is 46:10; Jer 18:7-10; Eph 1:11). Thus, the constancy of God is significant in all human relationships with him, including petitions offered in prayer.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>eternity<\/em> indicates his transcendence over time. He is timeless and everlasting. He has no beginning or end; he does not undergo growth, development, or maturation. He existed before the creation of the world; he dwells now in eternity; he will continue as the eternal God even when history ends. Scripture speaks of God as “eternal” (Dt 33:27), “the King” (1 Tm 1:17), “the beginning and the end” (Rv 22:13). He “inhabits eternity” (Is 57:15) and his “years have no end” (Ps 102:27; cf. 2 Pt 3:8). Although God is above time and is timeless, time is his creation and history is the arena of his work. “When the time had fully come God sent forth his Son” (Gal 4:4); Jesus Christ died on a Friday and rose on the third day.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>immensity<\/em> and <em>omnipresence<\/em> express his transcendence over space. God fills heaven and earth (Jer 23:23-24). Heaven is his throne, and the earth his footstool, so he is not restricted to a temple building (Is 66:1; Acts 17:24). Yet God is immanent in this world and is actively at work in it to establish his kingdom. No one can hide from the omnipresent God (Ps 139:6-12). Jesus promised, “I am with you always, to the close of the age” (Mt 28:20). Since Pentecost (Acts 2), the Holy Spirit is said actually to dwell within the bodies of believers (1 Cor 6:19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CommunicableAttributes\">Communicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>Many attributes of God can be classified under this heading, although it is sometimes difficult to say which biblical references to God should be regarded as attributes. A rich diversity of terminology is found in Scripture, with many synonyms. For convenience, the communicable attributes are often classified as intellectual, moral, and volitional.<\/p>\n<h5>Intellectual Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>God’s <em>knowledge<\/em> indicates that in a unique way God knows himself and all things possible and actual. <em>Omniscience<\/em> means that “he knows everything” (1 Jn 3:20). “Even before a word is on my tongue, lo, O <span>Lord<\/span>, thou knowest it altogether” (Ps 139:4), including the secret thoughts of a person’s heart. God’s righteous judgment is rooted in the fact that he “knows the thoughts of man” (Ps 94:11). Acknowledging that God’s omniscience is incomprehensible, the psalmist finds it a source of comfort (139:1-5). All the “treasures of wisdom and knowledge” are hidden in Christ (Col 2:3); therefore, the Christian is told to bring every thought captive to obey Christ (2 Cor 10:5). Christian sanctification includes renewal in knowledge to become more like Christ (Col 3:10).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>wisdom<\/em> indicates that he uses his knowledge in the best possible manner to achieve his goals. God’s works are varied, but they are all done in wisdom (Ps 104:24). “The <span>Lord<\/span> by wisdom founded the earth” (Prv 3:19); his providence also displays his wisdom (Gn 50:20). Redemption through Jesus Christ reveals God’s wisdom (1 Cor 1:24) and awakens awe and praise (Rom 11:33-36). Human beings should seek wisdom (Prv 3:21)—wisdom rooted in the fear of God (Jb 28:28; Ps 111:10; Prv 9:10). Christians are said to be “wise in Christ” (1 Cor 4:10), and Christ charges them to act wisely (Mt 10:16), thus emulating the wisdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>veracity<\/em> expresses his truthfulness and faithfulness. He is the truth and he is faithful to himself, to his Word, and to his promises (2 Tm 2:13). “God is light and in him is no darkness at all” (1 Jn 1:5); therefore, his followers are to walk in the light (vv 6-7). Jesus is “the way, and the truth, and the life” (Jn 14:6); hence, Christians are to walk in the truth and show faithfulness in their lives.<\/p>\n<h5>Moral Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>The most comprehensive description of God’s moral character is his <em>goodness.<\/em> God deals bountifully and kindly with all his creatures. He is “good to all” (Ps 145:9). Jesus insisted that “no one is good but God alone” (Mk 10:18; Lk 18:19). The redeemed praise God for his goodness (1 Chr 16:34; 2 Chr 5:13; Pss 106:1; 107:1; 118:1; 136:1; Jer 33:11) and are called upon to emulate this divine characteristic (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:27-36).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>love<\/em> is the heartbeat of the gospel. Perfect love flows among the Persons of the Trinity (Jn 3:35; 17:24). At Sinai God revealed himself as abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness (Ex 34:6-7), and all his covenantal relations with Abraham’s descendants showed his steadfast love. The chief manifestation of God’s love was the sending of his Son, Jesus Christ (Jn 3:16). The apostle John, who declared that “God is love,” pointed to the cross to indicate what that love really meant: “he loved us and sent his Son to be the expiation for our sins” (1 Jn 4:8, 10).<\/p>\n<p>God’s love shown to undeserving sinners is called <em>grace<\/em> (Eph 1:6-8; 2:7-9; Ti 3:4). <em>Mercy<\/em> is God’s love (sometimes his goodness) shown to those in misery and distress. God is <em>longsuffering<\/em> or patient in his love; he gives time for repentance.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>holiness<\/em> depicts the moral purity and excellence of God. The description of Jesus’ holiness is applicable to each of the Persons of the Trinity: “holy, blameless, unstained, separated from sinners, exalted above the heavens” (Heb 7:26). The root idea of holiness is to be separate or set apart. Because of his inherent holiness, God is distinct from everything impure or unholy. God alone is holy; his name is holy, and he bears the name the “Holy One” (Pss 78:41; 89:18; 99:3, 9; 111:9; Is 12:6; Jer 51:5; Rv 15:4). Angels praise God’s holiness (Is 6:3; Rv 4:8). Objects, places, and people are called holy when set apart for the worship of God. Because God is holy, his people are called to holiness (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2; 1 Pt 1:14-15). God’s discipline of his people is aimed at making them share his holiness (Heb 12:10). The holiness of God is so prominent in Scripture that some have (mistakenly) regarded it as God’s chief attribute.<\/p>\n<h5>Volitional Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>God’s <em>sovereignty<\/em> indicates the divine authority with which he rules the entire creation and in his sovereign good pleasure does whatever he wills. God is King over the entire creation, and he rules the destiny of human beings and nations. He restores his kingdom through Jesus Christ; the risen Lord revealed that all authority in heaven and on earth was given to him (Mt 28:18). Election to salvation in Christ is “according to the purpose of him who accomplishes all things according to the counsel of his will” (Eph 1:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). God’s sovereign will, though free, is not arbitrary; it is righteous and holy. He created the world and gave his law as the rule for his people’s lives; he covenants, blesses, and judges. God is the “King of kings and Lord of lords” (1 Tm 6:15); he calls all his subjects to obedient love (Dt 6:4-5; Mt 22:37-40; 1 Jn 5:3).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>sovereign power<\/em> means that he is without bounds or limit in ability; he is <em>omnipotent<\/em> or almighty (Rv 4:8). By his powerful word, he created all things, and upholds “the universe by his word of power” (Heb 1:3). There is nothing too hard for the Lord God Almighty (Gn 18:14; Jer 32:27; Mt 19:26); he keeps his gracious covenant and fulfills all his promises (Lk 1:37; 2 Tm 2:13; Heb 6:18). The gospel is “the power of God for salvation” (Rom 1:16), for Christ is “the power of God” to save (1 Cor 1:24). Hence, believers must come to know “the immeasurable greatness of his power in us who believe, according to the working of his great might which he accomplished in Christ when he raised him from the dead and made him sit at his right hand in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:19-20, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Glory<\/h5>\n<p>All the attributes of God are summarized in Scripture’s references to the <em>glory<\/em> of God. The majesty, splendor, beauty, and brilliance of God who dwells in unapproachable light are expressed by this indefinable term. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham (Acts 7:2); God showed his glory to Moses (Ex 33:18-19; 34:6-7). The God of the Lord Jesus Christ is the Father of glory (Eph 1:17). The heavens declare the glory of God (Ps 19:1); the majesty and glory of God fill heaven and earth (8:1). When finally every tongue shall confess Jesus as Lord, it will be for the glory of God the Father (Phil 2:11). Human beings were created for God’s glory, and Christian believers are instructed to do everything for the glory of God (1 Cor 10:31), thus reflecting in themselves his inherent glory.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GOD, Being and Attributes of<\/h3>\n<p>Inherent characteristics of God revealed in Scripture and displayed in God’s actions in biblical history. They are characteristics equally of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God’s attributes are revealed in progressively richer and fuller ways within the history of redemption.<\/p>\n<p>According to the Bible, the entire creation shows God’s deity and eternal power (Ps 19:1-6; Rom 1:20). God’s providence also reveals certain of his attributes (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:35; Acts 14:16-17; 17:22-31). The fullest revelation of God’s attributes is seen in his work of redemption through Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>How does Scripture express the characteristics of God? First, in the divine names by which God revealed himself (Gn 1:1; 2:4; 17:1; Ex 3:6, 14-15; 6:2-5). Some of God’s attributes are revealed implicitly in the biblical accounts of Creation, fall, Flood, Babel, and the exodus, and more fully in the various covenants God made with his people. To Israel, he identified himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Ex 3:15). To the pharaoh, he identified himself as the “God of Israel” or the “God of the Hebrews” (5:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>By the time the people of Israel had reached Mt Sinai, the revelation of God’s attributes in the biblical narrative had become more explicit: “The <span>Lord<\/span>, the <span>Lord<\/span>, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and the children’s children, to the third and the fourth generation” (Ex 34:6-7, <span>rsv<\/span>). This summary is repeated elsewhere with slight variations (Nm 14:18; Neh 9:17; Ps 103:8; Jer 32:18; Jon 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Attributes of God<\/p>\n<p>• Incommunicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>• Communicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAttributesofGod\">The Attributes of God<\/p>\n<p>The historic Christian confessions refer to various characteristics of God without calling them attributes or classifying them. The Westminster Shorter Catechism (1647) shows a tendency toward classification, describing God as “a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth.” The first four attributes qualify the others.<\/p>\n<p>Several ways of classifying the attributes have been suggested. Generally such schemes divide the divine attributes into pairs: negative and positive, natural and moral, absolute and relative, immanent and eminent, intransitive and transitive, quiescent and operative, antithetical and synthetical, or incommunicable and communicable. Roman Catholics prefer the distinction of negative and positive, or natural and moral. Lutherans generally favor the distinction between quiescent and operative attributes. Reformed and evangelical scholars usually distinguish incommunicable and communicable attributes. Karl Barth grouped the attributes under freedom and love, and then proposed pairs of attributes that reflect freedom-love or love-freedom. In spite of the diversity of labels given the groups of attributes, surprising agreement exists in the attributes listed under each group.<\/p>\n<p>This article will make a distinction between incommunicable and communicable attributes without considering the classification itself as significant. No classification of God’s attributes is fully satisfactory. The <em>incommunicable<\/em> attributes emphasize the absolute distinctness of God, his transcendent greatness and exalted nature. Such attributes have little or no analogy in God’s creatures. The <em>communicable<\/em> attributes find some reflection or analogy in human beings created in God’s image. They indicate the immanence of God in relation to creatures. Yet all the attributes are God’s attributes; the distinction between God and man, between Creator and creature, is always basic.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IncommunicableAttributes\">Incommunicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>Acknowledging some diversity of theological opinion, the following attributes will be considered incommunicable: unity, spirituality, independence, immutability, eternity, and immensity. In addition, the incomprehensibility of God must be mentioned.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>incomprehensibility<\/em> is sometimes included in lists of his attributes. It seems preferable to regard it as a description of human inability to understand God fully. Incomprehensibility is therefore not an attribute, although it is a given in every discussion of God. Through his revelation God is truly known by faith, yet no creature will ever comprehend God the Creator. Likewise, no one will ever fully understand any one of God’s attributes. Acknowledgment of God’s incomprehensibility should contribute to a spirit of humility in every consideration of God and his attributes (Pss 139:6; 145:3; Is 40:28; 55:8-9; Mt 11:25-27; Rom 11:33-36; 1 Cor 2:6-16; 13:8-13).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>unity<\/em> is an expression of monotheism—the fact that the God of Scripture is the only, living, true God (Dt 6:4; Mk 12:29; Jn 17:3). All other gods are idols and figments of human imagination. This attribute is reflected in the first commandment: “You shall have no other gods before me” (Ex 20:3).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>spirituality<\/em> indicates that God is not physical and is invisible. Positively it means that God is personal, living, self-conscious, and self-determining. The invisible God cannot be seen by human eyes (Ex 33:20), so the second commandment forbids every visible representation of God (20:4). Because God is Spirit, he must be worshiped in spirit and in truth (Jn 4:24).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>independence<\/em> or self-existence indicates that he is not dependent upon anything outside himself. He is self-sufficient in his existence, in his decrees, and in all his works. God has “life in himself” (Jn 5:26) and “he himself gives life and breath and everything” (Acts 17:25). To Israel, he revealed himself as the “<span>I Am<\/span>” (Ex 3:14), and he made Israel a covenant people for his own possession. God continues to work out his will in the world, and even though he uses various means, his independence remains intact. Thus, he enters into fellowship with his covenant people, and he publishes the gospel through human agents.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>immutability<\/em> or constancy expresses his changelessness and his faithfulness to himself, to his decrees, promises, and works. He remains forever the same true God who undergoes no change from within or from anything outside himself. And so in James 1:17 we read: “Every good endowment and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change” (<span>rsv<\/span>). God’s oath to Abraham expressed his immutability so that his covenant people could be sure of the “unchangeable character of his purpose” (Heb 6:17). Samuel told King Saul that the Lord would not “change his mind; for he is not a man” (1 Sm 15:29, <span>niv<\/span>; cf. Nm 23:19). “For I the <span>Lord<\/span> do not change” (Mal 3:6). That was God’s explanation for not destroying sinful Judah; he shows mercy and keeps his covenant. Because “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever,” Christians are warned not to be “led by diverse and strange teachings” (Heb 13:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>God’s immutability or constancy does not imply that he is static or immobile. He is a dynamic, living God who is constantly working (Jn 5:17). Sometimes God is described as being sorry, repenting, or changing his mind (Gn 6:6-7; 1 Sm 15:11; Jon 3:10). In their contexts, such figurative expressions show the constancy of a God who, in holiness and righteousness, always abhors sin and reacts against it. In his grace and mercy, he forgives the penitent, and he carries out his promises without fail (Ps 110:4; Is 46:10; Jer 18:7-10; Eph 1:11). Thus, the constancy of God is significant in all human relationships with him, including petitions offered in prayer.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>eternity<\/em> indicates his transcendence over time. He is timeless and everlasting. He has no beginning or end; he does not undergo growth, development, or maturation. He existed before the creation of the world; he dwells now in eternity; he will continue as the eternal God even when history ends. Scripture speaks of God as “eternal” (Dt 33:27), “the King” (1 Tm 1:17), “the beginning and the end” (Rv 22:13). He “inhabits eternity” (Is 57:15) and his “years have no end” (Ps 102:27; cf. 2 Pt 3:8). Although God is above time and is timeless, time is his creation and history is the arena of his work. “When the time had fully come God sent forth his Son” (Gal 4:4); Jesus Christ died on a Friday and rose on the third day.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>immensity<\/em> and <em>omnipresence<\/em> express his transcendence over space. God fills heaven and earth (Jer 23:23-24). Heaven is his throne, and the earth his footstool, so he is not restricted to a temple building (Is 66:1; Acts 17:24). Yet God is immanent in this world and is actively at work in it to establish his kingdom. No one can hide from the omnipresent God (Ps 139:6-12). Jesus promised, “I am with you always, to the close of the age” (Mt 28:20). Since Pentecost (Acts 2), the Holy Spirit is said actually to dwell within the bodies of believers (1 Cor 6:19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CommunicableAttributes\">Communicable Attributes<\/p>\n<p>Many attributes of God can be classified under this heading, although it is sometimes difficult to say which biblical references to God should be regarded as attributes. A rich diversity of terminology is found in Scripture, with many synonyms. For convenience, the communicable attributes are often classified as intellectual, moral, and volitional.<\/p>\n<h5>Intellectual Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>God’s <em>knowledge<\/em> indicates that in a unique way God knows himself and all things possible and actual. <em>Omniscience<\/em> means that “he knows everything” (1 Jn 3:20). “Even before a word is on my tongue, lo, O <span>Lord<\/span>, thou knowest it altogether” (Ps 139:4), including the secret thoughts of a person’s heart. God’s righteous judgment is rooted in the fact that he “knows the thoughts of man” (Ps 94:11). Acknowledging that God’s omniscience is incomprehensible, the psalmist finds it a source of comfort (139:1-5). All the “treasures of wisdom and knowledge” are hidden in Christ (Col 2:3); therefore, the Christian is told to bring every thought captive to obey Christ (2 Cor 10:5). Christian sanctification includes renewal in knowledge to become more like Christ (Col 3:10).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>wisdom<\/em> indicates that he uses his knowledge in the best possible manner to achieve his goals. God’s works are varied, but they are all done in wisdom (Ps 104:24). “The <span>Lord<\/span> by wisdom founded the earth” (Prv 3:19); his providence also displays his wisdom (Gn 50:20). Redemption through Jesus Christ reveals God’s wisdom (1 Cor 1:24) and awakens awe and praise (Rom 11:33-36). Human beings should seek wisdom (Prv 3:21)—wisdom rooted in the fear of God (Jb 28:28; Ps 111:10; Prv 9:10). Christians are said to be “wise in Christ” (1 Cor 4:10), and Christ charges them to act wisely (Mt 10:16), thus emulating the wisdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>veracity<\/em> expresses his truthfulness and faithfulness. He is the truth and he is faithful to himself, to his Word, and to his promises (2 Tm 2:13). “God is light and in him is no darkness at all” (1 Jn 1:5); therefore, his followers are to walk in the light (vv 6-7). Jesus is “the way, and the truth, and the life” (Jn 14:6); hence, Christians are to walk in the truth and show faithfulness in their lives.<\/p>\n<h5>Moral Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>The most comprehensive description of God’s moral character is his <em>goodness.<\/em> God deals bountifully and kindly with all his creatures. He is “good to all” (Ps 145:9). Jesus insisted that “no one is good but God alone” (Mk 10:18; Lk 18:19). The redeemed praise God for his goodness (1 Chr 16:34; 2 Chr 5:13; Pss 106:1; 107:1; 118:1; 136:1; Jer 33:11) and are called upon to emulate this divine characteristic (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:27-36).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>love<\/em> is the heartbeat of the gospel. Perfect love flows among the Persons of the Trinity (Jn 3:35; 17:24). At Sinai God revealed himself as abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness (Ex 34:6-7), and all his covenantal relations with Abraham’s descendants showed his steadfast love. The chief manifestation of God’s love was the sending of his Son, Jesus Christ (Jn 3:16). The apostle John, who declared that “God is love,” pointed to the cross to indicate what that love really meant: “he loved us and sent his Son to be the expiation for our sins” (1 Jn 4:8, 10).<\/p>\n<p>God’s love shown to undeserving sinners is called <em>grace<\/em> (Eph 1:6-8; 2:7-9; Ti 3:4). <em>Mercy<\/em> is God’s love (sometimes his goodness) shown to those in misery and distress. God is <em>longsuffering<\/em> or patient in his love; he gives time for repentance.<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>holiness<\/em> depicts the moral purity and excellence of God. The description of Jesus’ holiness is applicable to each of the Persons of the Trinity: “holy, blameless, unstained, separated from sinners, exalted above the heavens” (Heb 7:26). The root idea of holiness is to be separate or set apart. Because of his inherent holiness, God is distinct from everything impure or unholy. God alone is holy; his name is holy, and he bears the name the “Holy One” (Pss 78:41; 89:18; 99:3, 9; 111:9; Is 12:6; Jer 51:5; Rv 15:4). Angels praise God’s holiness (Is 6:3; Rv 4:8). Objects, places, and people are called holy when set apart for the worship of God. Because God is holy, his people are called to holiness (Lv 11:44-45; 19:2; 1 Pt 1:14-15). God’s discipline of his people is aimed at making them share his holiness (Heb 12:10). The holiness of God is so prominent in Scripture that some have (mistakenly) regarded it as God’s chief attribute.<\/p>\n<h5>Volitional Attributes<\/h5>\n<p>God’s <em>sovereignty<\/em> indicates the divine authority with which he rules the entire creation and in his sovereign good pleasure does whatever he wills. God is King over the entire creation, and he rules the destiny of human beings and nations. He restores his kingdom through Jesus Christ; the risen Lord revealed that all authority in heaven and on earth was given to him (Mt 28:18). Election to salvation in Christ is “according to the purpose of him who accomplishes all things according to the counsel of his will” (Eph 1:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). God’s sovereign will, though free, is not arbitrary; it is righteous and holy. He created the world and gave his law as the rule for his people’s lives; he covenants, blesses, and judges. God is the “King of kings and Lord of lords” (1 Tm 6:15); he calls all his subjects to obedient love (Dt 6:4-5; Mt 22:37-40; 1 Jn 5:3).<\/p>\n<p>God’s <em>sovereign power<\/em> means that he is without bounds or limit in ability; he is <em>omnipotent<\/em> or almighty (Rv 4:8). By his powerful word, he created all things, and upholds “the universe by his word of power” (Heb 1:3). There is nothing too hard for the Lord God Almighty (Gn 18:14; Jer 32:27; Mt 19:26); he keeps his gracious covenant and fulfills all his promises (Lk 1:37; 2 Tm 2:13; Heb 6:18). The gospel is “the power of God for salvation” (Rom 1:16), for Christ is “the power of God” to save (1 Cor 1:24). Hence, believers must come to know “the immeasurable greatness of his power in us who believe, according to the working of his great might which he accomplished in Christ when he raised him from the dead and made him sit at his right hand in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:19-20, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Glory<\/h5>\n<p>All the attributes of God are summarized in Scripture’s references to the <em>glory<\/em> of God. The majesty, splendor, beauty, and brilliance of God who dwells in unapproachable light are expressed by this indefinable term. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham (Acts 7:2); God showed his glory to Moses (Ex 33:18-19; 34:6-7). The God of the Lord Jesus Christ is the Father of glory (Eph 1:17). The heavens declare the glory of God (Ps 19:1); the majesty and glory of God fill heaven and earth (8:1). When finally every tongue shall confess Jesus as Lord, it will be for the glory of God the Father (Phil 2:11). Human beings were created for God’s glory, and Christian believers are instructed to do everything for the glory of God (1 Cor 10:31), thus reflecting in themselves his inherent glory.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GOD, Being and Attributes of Inherent characteristics of God revealed in Scripture and displayed in God’s actions in biblical history. They are characteristics equally of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God’s attributes are revealed in progressively richer and fuller ways within the history of redemption. According to the Bible, the entire creation shows God’s deity and eternal power (Ps 19:1-6; Rom 1:20). God’s providence also reveals certain of his attributes (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:35; Ac...","summary_en":"GOD, Being and Attributes of Inherent characteristics of God revealed in Scripture and displayed in God’s actions in biblical history. They are characteristics equally of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. God’s attributes are revealed in progressively richer and fuller ways within the history of redemption. According to the Bible, the entire creation shows God’s deity and eternal power (Ps 19:1-6; Rom 1:20). God’s providence also reveals certain of his attributes (Mt 5:45; Lk 6:35; Ac...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23413,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Lord","title_en":"Lord","content_ro":"<h3>LORD<\/h3>\n<p>“Lord” in English is the rendering of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘adonai<\/span> or of the Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kurios<\/span><em>.<\/em> The Hebrew YHWH is usually rendered “<span>Lord<\/span>”; <em>See<\/em> Yahweh (YHWH).<\/p>\n<p>God’s rule and authority as Lord rests ultimately upon his creation and ownership of all things and people (Ps 24:1-2). God’s total supremacy over nature is emphasized by his being called the Lord over earthquakes, wind, fire (1 Kgs 19:10-14), stars (Is 40:26), beasts and sea monsters (Jb 40–41), and primeval chaos (Pss 74:12-14; 89:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets indicated that God is Lord or King of history because he directs the affairs of humans and nations (1 Kgs 19:15-18; Is 10:5-9; Am 9:7) and he is the Lord of universal morality (Ez 25–32; Am 1:3–2:16). But he is especially the Lord of Israel; his expressed will represents their civil and religious constitution and demands absolute obedience (Ex 20:2). The divine sovereignty was, however, Israel’s comfort under oppression and hope for the future, when a triumphant Day of the Lord would right its wrongs, punish its oppressors, and restore its glory (Is 2:2-4, 11-12; 34:8; Ez 30:1-5; Jl 2:31–3:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Septuagint, the regular expression for “Lord\/ lord\/master” is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kurios<\/span><em>,<\/em> which in the Greek NT also is used of masters, husbands, and rulers (Mt 25:11; Lk 14:21; Acts 25:26; 1 Pt 3:6); of God (Mt 11:25; Heb 8:2); and of pagan gods (1 Cor 8:5). It is used of Jesus as a customary title of respect (“sir,” Mt 8:2; 15:25); it also retains its Septuagint associations of faith, reverence, and worship (Mt 3:3; Lk 7:13; Acts 5:14; 9:10; 1 Cor 6:13-14; Heb 2:3; Jas 5:7); it appears in phrases like “the Lord Jesus,” “the Lord’s Day,” “the Lord’s Table,” “the Spirit of the Lord” (who is also “Lord,” 2 Cor 3:17), “in the Lord,” “from the Lord,” “light in the Lord,” “boast in the Lord.” Sometimes it is not clear whether God or Christ is intended (Acts 9:31; 2 Cor 8:21). The title is attributed to Jesus himself in John 13:13-14; in John 20:28 Jesus accepts the title “My Lord and my God!”<\/p>\n<p>In the first Christian sermon Jesus’ lordship is made central to salvation (Acts 2:21). It appears that the public confession of Jesus as Lord was the approved focus and expression of Christian faith, and the basis of membership in the apostolic church (Acts 16:31; Rom 10:9; 1 Cor 12:3; Phil 2:11). Thus, it could become more a formal statement than a sincere expression of belief—hence, the warnings in Matthew 7:21 and Luke 6:46.<\/p>\n<p>From the first, such a confession was fraught with meaning. In common usage “lord” reflected the slave system and implied the absolute power exercised by the master over the purchased slave. So Paul unhesitatingly expounds the moral implications of Christian redemption (1 Cor 6:19-20; 7:22-23; <em>see<\/em> photo). To Jewish minds, the title had messianic overtones of kingship and authority (Lk 20:41-44), offending both Jews and Romans. Politically, “Lord” was a title claimed by Caesar. Therefore, it is significant that Jesus is called “King of kings and Lord of lords” during the age of Domitian when Caesar worship was mandated (Rv 17:14; 19:16).<\/p>\n\n<p>Among Greek-speaking Jews of the dispersion, familiar with the Septuagint, as among Gentiles, for whom “Lord” was the customary title for the many gods of polytheism, the application to Jesus of the epithet belonging to godhead was blasphemous, especially when associated with “Son of God,” prayer, praise, total devotion, and hope (1 Cor 8:5-6; Phil 2:9-11; 1 Thes 4:14-17). On every level, therefore, the adoring tribute given to Jesus was loaded not only with spiritual meaning but with positive and imminent danger.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; God, Being and Attributes of; God, Names of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LORD<\/h3>\n<p>“Lord” in English is the rendering of the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘adonai<\/span> or of the Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kurios<\/span><em>.<\/em> The Hebrew YHWH is usually rendered “<span>Lord<\/span>”; <em>See<\/em> Yahweh (YHWH).<\/p>\n<p>God’s rule and authority as Lord rests ultimately upon his creation and ownership of all things and people (Ps 24:1-2). God’s total supremacy over nature is emphasized by his being called the Lord over earthquakes, wind, fire (1 Kgs 19:10-14), stars (Is 40:26), beasts and sea monsters (Jb 40–41), and primeval chaos (Pss 74:12-14; 89:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets indicated that God is Lord or King of history because he directs the affairs of humans and nations (1 Kgs 19:15-18; Is 10:5-9; Am 9:7) and he is the Lord of universal morality (Ez 25–32; Am 1:3–2:16). But he is especially the Lord of Israel; his expressed will represents their civil and religious constitution and demands absolute obedience (Ex 20:2). The divine sovereignty was, however, Israel’s comfort under oppression and hope for the future, when a triumphant Day of the Lord would right its wrongs, punish its oppressors, and restore its glory (Is 2:2-4, 11-12; 34:8; Ez 30:1-5; Jl 2:31–3:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Septuagint, the regular expression for “Lord\/ lord\/master” is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kurios<\/span><em>,<\/em> which in the Greek NT also is used of masters, husbands, and rulers (Mt 25:11; Lk 14:21; Acts 25:26; 1 Pt 3:6); of God (Mt 11:25; Heb 8:2); and of pagan gods (1 Cor 8:5). It is used of Jesus as a customary title of respect (“sir,” Mt 8:2; 15:25); it also retains its Septuagint associations of faith, reverence, and worship (Mt 3:3; Lk 7:13; Acts 5:14; 9:10; 1 Cor 6:13-14; Heb 2:3; Jas 5:7); it appears in phrases like “the Lord Jesus,” “the Lord’s Day,” “the Lord’s Table,” “the Spirit of the Lord” (who is also “Lord,” 2 Cor 3:17), “in the Lord,” “from the Lord,” “light in the Lord,” “boast in the Lord.” Sometimes it is not clear whether God or Christ is intended (Acts 9:31; 2 Cor 8:21). The title is attributed to Jesus himself in John 13:13-14; in John 20:28 Jesus accepts the title “My Lord and my God!”<\/p>\n<p>In the first Christian sermon Jesus’ lordship is made central to salvation (Acts 2:21). It appears that the public confession of Jesus as Lord was the approved focus and expression of Christian faith, and the basis of membership in the apostolic church (Acts 16:31; Rom 10:9; 1 Cor 12:3; Phil 2:11). Thus, it could become more a formal statement than a sincere expression of belief—hence, the warnings in Matthew 7:21 and Luke 6:46.<\/p>\n<p>From the first, such a confession was fraught with meaning. In common usage “lord” reflected the slave system and implied the absolute power exercised by the master over the purchased slave. So Paul unhesitatingly expounds the moral implications of Christian redemption (1 Cor 6:19-20; 7:22-23; <em>see<\/em> photo). To Jewish minds, the title had messianic overtones of kingship and authority (Lk 20:41-44), offending both Jews and Romans. Politically, “Lord” was a title claimed by Caesar. Therefore, it is significant that Jesus is called “King of kings and Lord of lords” during the age of Domitian when Caesar worship was mandated (Rv 17:14; 19:16).<\/p>\n\n<p>Among Greek-speaking Jews of the dispersion, familiar with the Septuagint, as among Gentiles, for whom “Lord” was the customary title for the many gods of polytheism, the application to Jesus of the epithet belonging to godhead was blasphemous, especially when associated with “Son of God,” prayer, praise, total devotion, and hope (1 Cor 8:5-6; Phil 2:9-11; 1 Thes 4:14-17). On every level, therefore, the adoring tribute given to Jesus was loaded not only with spiritual meaning but with positive and imminent danger.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; God, Being and Attributes of; God, Names of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LORD “Lord” in English is the rendering of the Hebrew ‘adonai or of the Greek kurios. The Hebrew YHWH is usually rendered “Lord”; See Yahweh (YHWH). God’s rule and authority as Lord rests ultimately upon his creation and ownership of all things and people (Ps 24:1-2). God’s total supremacy over nature is emphasized by his being called the Lord over earthquakes, wind, fire (1 Kgs 19:10-14), stars (Is 40:26), beasts and sea monsters (Jb 40–41), and primeval chaos (Pss 74:12-14; 89:8-10). The la...","summary_en":"LORD “Lord” in English is the rendering of the Hebrew ‘adonai or of the Greek kurios. The Hebrew YHWH is usually rendered “Lord”; See Yahweh (YHWH). God’s rule and authority as Lord rests ultimately upon his creation and ownership of all things and people (Ps 24:1-2). God’s total supremacy over nature is emphasized by his being called the Lord over earthquakes, wind, fire (1 Kgs 19:10-14), stars (Is 40:26), beasts and sea monsters (Jb 40–41), and primeval chaos (Pss 74:12-14; 89:8-10). The la...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24758,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of Matthew","title_en":"Gospel of Matthew","content_ro":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","summary_en":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54706,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:25","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:25-30<\/strong> This passage focuses on the remnant who, despite the present generation’s overall rejection of the Messiah, willingly embrace him and follow his teachings.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:25-30<\/strong> This passage focuses on the remnant who, despite the present generation’s overall rejection of the Messiah, willingly embrace him and follow his teachings.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:25-30 This passage focuses on the remnant who, despite the present generation’s overall rejection of the Messiah, willingly embrace him and follow his teachings.","summary_en":"11:25-30 This passage focuses on the remnant who, despite the present generation’s overall rejection of the Messiah, willingly embrace him and follow his teachings.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54707,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:25","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:25<\/strong> <em>those who think themselves wise and clever:<\/em> The Pharisees and teachers of religious law thought their access to God was guaranteed through their knowledge and practice of the law. Jesus’ disciples were more <em>childlike<\/em> (see 21:15-16).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:25<\/strong> <em>those who think themselves wise and clever:<\/em> The Pharisees and teachers of religious law thought their access to God was guaranteed through their knowledge and practice of the law. Jesus’ disciples were more <em>childlike<\/em> (see 21:15-16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:25 those who think themselves wise and clever: The Pharisees and teachers of religious law thought their access to God was guaranteed through their knowledge and practice of the law. Jesus’ disciples were more childlike (see 21:15-16).","summary_en":"11:25 those who think themselves wise and clever: The Pharisees and teachers of religious law thought their access to God was guaranteed through their knowledge and practice of the law. Jesus’ disciples were more childlike (see 21:15-16).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82332,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:25","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:25-30<\/strong> This passage focuses on the remnant who, despite the present generation’s overall rejection of the Messiah, willingly embrace him and follow his teachings.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:25-30<\/strong> This passage focuses on the remnant who, despite the present generation’s overall rejection of the Messiah, willingly embrace him and follow his teachings.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:25-30 This passage focuses on the remnant who, despite the present generation’s overall rejection of the Messiah, willingly embrace him and follow his teachings.","summary_en":"11:25-30 This passage focuses on the remnant who, despite the present generation’s overall rejection of the Messiah, willingly embrace him and follow his teachings.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82333,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:25","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:25<\/strong> <em>those who think themselves wise and clever:<\/em> The Pharisees and teachers of religious law thought their access to God was guaranteed through their knowledge and practice of the law. Jesus’ disciples were more <em>childlike<\/em> (see 21:15-16).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:25<\/strong> <em>those who think themselves wise and clever:<\/em> The Pharisees and teachers of religious law thought their access to God was guaranteed through their knowledge and practice of the law. Jesus’ disciples were more <em>childlike<\/em> (see 21:15-16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:25 those who think themselves wise and clever: The Pharisees and teachers of religious law thought their access to God was guaranteed through their knowledge and practice of the law. Jesus’ disciples were more childlike (see 21:15-16).","summary_en":"11:25 those who think themselves wise and clever: The Pharisees and teachers of religious law thought their access to God was guaranteed through their knowledge and practice of the law. Jesus’ disciples were more childlike (see 21:15-16).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":109958,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:25","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:25-30<\/strong> This passage focuses on the remnant who, despite the present generation’s overall rejection of the Messiah, willingly embrace him and follow his teachings.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:25-30<\/strong> This passage focuses on the remnant who, despite the present generation’s overall rejection of the Messiah, willingly embrace him and follow his teachings.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:25-30 This passage focuses on the remnant who, despite the present generation’s overall rejection of the Messiah, willingly embrace him and follow his teachings.","summary_en":"11:25-30 This passage focuses on the remnant who, despite the present generation’s overall rejection of the Messiah, willingly embrace him and follow his teachings.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":109959,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:25","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:25<\/strong> <em>those who think themselves wise and clever:<\/em> The Pharisees and teachers of religious law thought their access to God was guaranteed through their knowledge and practice of the law. Jesus’ disciples were more <em>childlike<\/em> (see 21:15-16).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:25<\/strong> <em>those who think themselves wise and clever:<\/em> The Pharisees and teachers of religious law thought their access to God was guaranteed through their knowledge and practice of the law. Jesus’ disciples were more <em>childlike<\/em> (see 21:15-16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:25 those who think themselves wise and clever: The Pharisees and teachers of religious law thought their access to God was guaranteed through their knowledge and practice of the law. Jesus’ disciples were more childlike (see 21:15-16).","summary_en":"11:25 those who think themselves wise and clever: The Pharisees and teachers of religious law thought their access to God was guaranteed through their knowledge and practice of the law. Jesus’ disciples were more childlike (see 21:15-16).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137584,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:25","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:25-30<\/strong> This passage focuses on the remnant who, despite the present generation’s overall rejection of the Messiah, willingly embrace him and follow his teachings.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:25-30<\/strong> This passage focuses on the remnant who, despite the present generation’s overall rejection of the Messiah, willingly embrace him and follow his teachings.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:25-30 This passage focuses on the remnant who, despite the present generation’s overall rejection of the Messiah, willingly embrace him and follow his teachings.","summary_en":"11:25-30 This passage focuses on the remnant who, despite the present generation’s overall rejection of the Messiah, willingly embrace him and follow his teachings.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137585,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:25","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:25<\/strong> <em>those who think themselves wise and clever:<\/em> The Pharisees and teachers of religious law thought their access to God was guaranteed through their knowledge and practice of the law. Jesus’ disciples were more <em>childlike<\/em> (see 21:15-16).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:25<\/strong> <em>those who think themselves wise and clever:<\/em> The Pharisees and teachers of religious law thought their access to God was guaranteed through their knowledge and practice of the law. Jesus’ disciples were more <em>childlike<\/em> (see 21:15-16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:25 those who think themselves wise and clever: The Pharisees and teachers of religious law thought their access to God was guaranteed through their knowledge and practice of the law. Jesus’ disciples were more childlike (see 21:15-16).","summary_en":"11:25 those who think themselves wise and clever: The Pharisees and teachers of religious law thought their access to God was guaranteed through their knowledge and practice of the law. Jesus’ disciples were more childlike (see 21:15-16).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65146,"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":92772,"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":120398,"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":148024,"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}],"27":[{"id":19626,"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":31602,"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":54708,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:27","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:27<\/strong> Jesus was revealing his intimate relationship to the <em>Father<\/em>. Everything he said and did was rooted in this Father–Son unity (see John 10:14-15; 14:6-7; 15:23-24; 16:15; 17:25-26).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:27<\/strong> Jesus was revealing his intimate relationship to the <em>Father<\/em>. Everything he said and did was rooted in this Father–Son unity (see John 10:14-15; 14:6-7; 15:23-24; 16:15; 17:25-26).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:27 Jesus was revealing his intimate relationship to the Father. Everything he said and did was rooted in this Father–Son unity (see John 10:14-15; 14:6-7; 15:23-24; 16:15; 17:25-26).","summary_en":"11:27 Jesus was revealing his intimate relationship to the Father. Everything he said and did was rooted in this Father–Son unity (see John 10:14-15; 14:6-7; 15:23-24; 16:15; 17:25-26).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82334,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:27","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:27<\/strong> Jesus was revealing his intimate relationship to the <em>Father<\/em>. Everything he said and did was rooted in this Father–Son unity (see John 10:14-15; 14:6-7; 15:23-24; 16:15; 17:25-26).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:27<\/strong> Jesus was revealing his intimate relationship to the <em>Father<\/em>. Everything he said and did was rooted in this Father–Son unity (see John 10:14-15; 14:6-7; 15:23-24; 16:15; 17:25-26).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:27 Jesus was revealing his intimate relationship to the Father. Everything he said and did was rooted in this Father–Son unity (see John 10:14-15; 14:6-7; 15:23-24; 16:15; 17:25-26).","summary_en":"11:27 Jesus was revealing his intimate relationship to the Father. Everything he said and did was rooted in this Father–Son unity (see John 10:14-15; 14:6-7; 15:23-24; 16:15; 17:25-26).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":109960,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:27","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:27<\/strong> Jesus was revealing his intimate relationship to the <em>Father<\/em>. Everything he said and did was rooted in this Father–Son unity (see John 10:14-15; 14:6-7; 15:23-24; 16:15; 17:25-26).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:27<\/strong> Jesus was revealing his intimate relationship to the <em>Father<\/em>. Everything he said and did was rooted in this Father–Son unity (see John 10:14-15; 14:6-7; 15:23-24; 16:15; 17:25-26).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:27 Jesus was revealing his intimate relationship to the Father. Everything he said and did was rooted in this Father–Son unity (see John 10:14-15; 14:6-7; 15:23-24; 16:15; 17:25-26).","summary_en":"11:27 Jesus was revealing his intimate relationship to the Father. Everything he said and did was rooted in this Father–Son unity (see John 10:14-15; 14:6-7; 15:23-24; 16:15; 17:25-26).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137586,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:27","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:27<\/strong> Jesus was revealing his intimate relationship to the <em>Father<\/em>. Everything he said and did was rooted in this Father–Son unity (see John 10:14-15; 14:6-7; 15:23-24; 16:15; 17:25-26).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:27<\/strong> Jesus was revealing his intimate relationship to the <em>Father<\/em>. Everything he said and did was rooted in this Father–Son unity (see John 10:14-15; 14:6-7; 15:23-24; 16:15; 17:25-26).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:27 Jesus was revealing his intimate relationship to the Father. Everything he said and did was rooted in this Father–Son unity (see John 10:14-15; 14:6-7; 15:23-24; 16:15; 17:25-26).","summary_en":"11:27 Jesus was revealing his intimate relationship to the Father. Everything he said and did was rooted in this Father–Son unity (see John 10:14-15; 14:6-7; 15:23-24; 16:15; 17:25-26).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"28":[{"id":14559,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel","title_en":"Gospel","content_ro":"<h3>GOSPEL<\/h3>\n<p>Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon <em>godspell<\/em> denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelMessageofIsaiah\">The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his saving action except in his own nature. Israel’s deliverance is undeserved; she is no more worthy of the divine love now than when she went into captivity. In whatever measure she has paid the just due for her past sins (Is 40:2), she remains a sinful people (42:25; 46:12-13; 48:1). It is only by God’s grace that she is saved (55:1-7). By God’s design, Israel’s salvation depends not upon her own righteousness but upon his (41:10; 45:24; 46:13; 51:5-6). There being no righteousness to reward, the Lord acts to <em>create<\/em> righteousness in Israel (45:8; 61:3, 10-11). Yet as these references indicate, salvation is not accomplished at the expense of justice. The penalty for Israel’s sins is to be paid in full. God’s mercy is not hereby called into question. On the contrary, it is precisely here that his mercy is most poignantly expressed, for the penalty is exacted not from his people but from the Servant appointed to stand in their place (53:4-12). Through the Servant’s work, many shall be justified (53:11). The coming of the Evangelist—the preacher of the good news—is predicted in Isaiah 61. He is called the anointed One (v 1) who proclaims the year of the Lord’s favor (v 2). God will be glorified through his preaching (v 3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelintheNewTestament\">The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In only two places (Gal 3:8; Heb 4:2, 6) does the NT speak of the proclamation of the gospel prior to the Christian era. This is quite remarkable, given (1) the unmistakable presence of the gospel in the OT, (2) the extent of gospel terminology in the NT (in the Greek the noun appears 76 times; and the verb, 54), and (3) the fact that the NT presents Christ as the fulfillment of the OT and draws heavily on the OT to interpret his person and work. Not only is it remarkable; it is very significant. It indicates that the NT usage depends not only upon the <em>character<\/em> of the message (truth about salvation) but also upon <em>historical events.<\/em> Almost without exception, the NT restricts its application of gospel terminology to proclamations made during the time of fulfillment—the age in which the salvation promised in the OT is actually accomplished. The NT is preoccupied, not with promises of salvation, but with news of salvation. According to Mark 1:1-4, the gospel “begins” not in the OT but with John the Baptist, in whose work OT prophecy is fulfilled. In Romans 1:1-5 the gospel is represented as a blessing promised in the OT but not actually given until Jesus comes (see also Acts 13:32-33).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGoodNewsofChristsComing\">The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>The promised birth of John the Baptist is good news (Lk 1:19), not only for his parents (vv 7, 24-25) but for all the people: John is sent to prepare them for Messiah’s coming (vv 14-17, 67-79). John’s own preaching is gospel (3:18) for the same reason. The Messiah would be coming to execute judgment, a process that involves both condemnation and salvation (vv 3-17). John’s message is gospel for sinners in that they are warned of impending doom and urged to repent before the ax falls (vv 7-9); it is gospel for the repentant in that they are promised forgiveness (v 3) and membership in Messiah’s community (v 17). The birth of the Savior himself is announced as good news bringing great joy (2:10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelaccordingtoJesus\">The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Kingdom of God<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was authorized by God and anointed by the Spirit to proclaim the gospel (Mk 1:14; Lk 4:18). At the heart of his preaching stands the announcement “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel” (Mk 1:15). (For further references to this gospel, see Mt 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; 26:13; Mk 8:35; 10:29; 13:10; 14:9; Lk 4:43; 8:1; 16:16.) The message is good news for several reasons: (1) The kingdom is coming. The God whom Jesus proclaims is sovereign over all he has made. Yet paradoxically his rule is incomplete: his will is not done on earth as it is in heaven; wrong, not right, prevails. But these conditions are not final, according to Jesus. With the coming of the kingdom, God’s rule will be completed; wrong will be judged, righteousness established, and his people blessed. (2) The kingdom is <em>now<\/em> being inaugurated. “The time is fulfilled,” declares Jesus (Mk 1:15a). The time appointed for the fulfillment of the OT promises has arrived. (3) The consummation of the kingdom is therefore no longer a distant prospect; the full realization of God’s rule is “at hand” (Mk 1:15b). (4) God is establishing his rule for a saving purpose. This is implied in Jesus’ call to repentance (Mk 1:15c). It is especially clear in the passages to which we now turn.<\/p>\n<h5>The Salvation of the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Invited to read the Scripture in the synagogue at Nazareth, Jesus turns to Isaiah 61: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord” (Lk 4:18-19, <span>rsv<\/span>). Having read the prophecy, Jesus announces its fulfillment in his own ministry (v 21). Included among those whom Jesus has come to free are the physically infirm, such as the blind (v 18) and the leprous (v 27) (cf. the references to healing miracles in vv 23, 33-41; the close connection between evangelizing and healing in Mt 4:23; 9:35; 11:5; Lk 7:21-22; 9:6; and the description in Mt 12:22-29; Lk 13:11-16, of the physically afflicted as captives of Satan now liberated by Jesus). Also included are the materially poor—people like the widow helped by Elijah during the famine (Lk 4:25-26). It is the literally poor and hungry whom Jesus pronounces “blessed” in Luke 6:20-21. Yet it is primarily “spiritual” poverty that is in view. Still applying Isaiah 61, Jesus speaks in Matthew 5:3 of the “poor in spirit.” These are people broken and grieved by misery and poverty, oppression and injustice, suffering and death, national apostasy and personal sin—people who in their extremity turn to God and longingly wait for him to bring forth justice, bestow his mercy, and establish his kingdom. It is to just such people that Jesus brings good news (Mt 5:3-10). God sent him to usher in the kingdom, to rescue the lost, to liberate the enslaved, to cure the afflicted, to bind up hearts that are broken, and to forgive the guilty (Mk 2:5, 10, 17; 10:45; Lk 4:18-21; 7:48-49; 15:1-32; 19:10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gift of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>The coming of the kingdom is not the effect or the reward of human effort but God’s answer to the human predicament—the gift of his favor (Lk 12:32). Correspondingly, the explanation for the salvation of the poor lies nowhere but in God’s own character. As the prodigal himself recognized, he hardly deserved to be his father’s servant, much less his son. Nothing he did, not even his repentance, accounted for the father’s love (15:11-32). In the parable of Matthew 20:1-16, it is owing entirely to the goodness of the employer that the last workers to be hired receive a full day’s wages. The first debtor in the story of Matthew 18:23-35 earned nothing but the right to be sold into slavery; instead, the king canceled his enormous debt. The publican, who had nothing to offer God but a confession of sin and plea for mercy, went home justified (Lk 18:13-14). The same holds true for the more virtuous among the poor, such as the persons described in Matthew 5:7-10. Their virtue is real, not imagined. Yet in keeping God’s commands, they do not put him in their debt; they are simply doing their duty (Lk 17:7-10). Furthermore, even the most merciful need divine mercy (Mt 5:7). For even those most zealous to obey God’s law are unable to fulfill all its requirements (cf. 11:28-30). The first servant in Matthew 18:23-35 owes far more money than someone in such a situation could possibly pay—which serves to magnify the generosity of the king. Grace depends for its exercise upon the inability of its objects (Lk 14:12-14).<\/p>\n<h5>The Call to Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The Israelites are without exception a sinful people, all of them needing the salvation that Jesus brings (Mt 1:21; Lk 1:77). In demonstration of God’s grace, Jesus proclaimed his gospel to the entire nation (Mt 4:23; 9:35; 15:24; Lk 4:43; 9:6; 20:1). From the most respectable to the least, all are summoned to submit to God’s rule, all are invited to come and partake freely of the banquet he has spread (Lk 14:16-24). But the gift of salvation must be received if it is to be experienced (Mk 10:15). And while it is indeed a gift that costs nothing, it is also a priceless treasure for which a wise person will freely sacrifice everything else (Mt 13:44-46), a sacrifice exceeded only by the cost of rejecting the gospel (Mt 11:20-24; Mk 8:34-39; Lk 14:24, 33). “Repent and believe in the gospel,” Jesus commands (Mk 1:15). The self-righteous and the self-sufficient must be jolted out of their false sense of security and humbly recognize their need for God (Lk 6:24-26). Only then will Jesus’ message to the poor be seen as gospel. An announcement of liberation (4:18-19) is good news only to people who are enslaved and know they are. The command applies also to the destitute and the afflicted. Those among them who bemoan their lot must repent of their sins. But something further is needed for the response to be complete: a person cannot believe Jesus’ gospel without a commitment to the <em>Person<\/em> of Christ (Jn 3:16). Even those who are already “poor in spirit,” in the sense defined earlier, are not really “blessed” until they acknowledge the truth of Jesus’ claims (Mt 11:6) and commit themselves to a life of obedience on his terms (7:21-27). This prepares us for the next point.<\/p>\n<h5>Summary<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout Jesus’ earthly ministry, the theme of his gospel remains the dawning of God’s kingdom (Mt 4:23; 24:14; Lk 4:43; 16:16), a message that is preached almost exclusively to Jews (Mt 10:5-6; 15:24). Yet Jesus also provides glimpses into what the gospel was to become once his work on earth was accomplished: (1) In Mark 8:35 and 10:29 Jesus speaks of individuals who needed to make great sacrifices “for my sake and for the gospel.” While distinguished from each other, the person of Jesus and the gospel are here associated in the closest possible way. The time was approaching when the Proclaimer of the gospel would become the Proclaimed. (2) In Mark 13:10 and Matthew 24:14 (and the textually doubtful Mk 16:15) Jesus foretells the preaching of the gospel of the kingdom to the gentile nations. (3) In Mark 14, having interpreted a woman’s action (v 3) as an anointing of his body beforehand for burial (v 8), Jesus declares, “And truly, I say to you, wherever the gospel is preached in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her” (v 9, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 26:13). This statement strongly implies that both the person of Jesus and the event of his death will figure prominently in the message that is to be proclaimed; otherwise, it is strange that the gospel and this particular act should be so solemnly bound together. Thus, here in the text already is an indication of how crucial Jesus’ death is both for the provision of the salvation announced in his gospel (cf. Mk 14:22-24) and for the launching of the evangelistic mission to the Gentiles (Mt 20:28 is vital for explaining the shift from Mt 15:24 to 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelafterJesusResurrection\">The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p>After the resurrection of Jesus, the gospel was proclaimed by his eyewitnesses. The contents of this gospel are recorded in the book of Acts and in Paul’s letters. Of the 43 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelizomai<\/span> (“evangelize”) beyond the Gospels, 15 occur in Acts and 21 in Paul’s writings; of the 64 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelion<\/span> (“gospel”), 2 occur in Acts and no fewer than 60 in Paul.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Having risen from the dead, Jesus Christ again evangelizes (Eph 2:16-17), doing so now through his appointed representatives (Rom 15:16-18; 1 Cor 1:17; 9:12-18; Gal 4:13-14; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:9-11). More than that, Christ has become the central theme of the gospel; the Proclaimer is now the Proclaimed. This is repeatedly affirmed in Acts (5:42; 8:4-5, 35; 11:20; 17:18) and in Paul’s writings (Rom 1:1-4; 10:8-17; 15:19-20; 2 Cor 4:4-6; 11:4; Gal 1:16; Eph 3:8; Phil 1:15-18; 2 Tm 2:8). The NT always speaks of <em>the gospel<\/em>—never the gospels—of Christ. A second gospel is as inconceivable and as unnecessary as a second Christ. This is the one gospel that God authorizes (e.g., Rom 1:1-17) and proclaims (e.g., 2 Thes 2:13-14). Galatians 2:7-9 speaks not of two gospels but of two mission fields. Paul (the apostle to the uncircumcised) and Peter (the apostle to the circumcised) are both entrusted with “the gospel of Christ” (Gal 1:7; cf. 1 Cor 15:1-11), the message that God has ordained for the salvation of Jews and Gentiles alike (Rom 1:16). The “different gospel” that Paul denounces in Galatians 1:6-9 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is not another gospel about Jesus but a message about “another Jesus”—not the real one, but one who exists only in the minds and the messages of those who proclaim him. To preach the true Christ is to preach the true gospel, however questionable one’s motives (Phil 1:15-18, 27), and to respond rightly to the gospel is to turn to Christ (Acts 11:20-21; Rom 10:8-17; Gal 2:14-16).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Witness to Saving Events<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel bears witness to every aspect of Christ’s saving work, from his birth (Rom 1:3; 2 Tm 2:8) and public ministry (Mk 1:1; Acts 10:36-38) to his second coming (Col 1:5, 23; cf. 3:1-4; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and the last judgment (Rom 2:16). But it is the death and the resurrection of Christ that are most crucial for the accomplishment of salvation, and that are therefore most prominent in the gospel’s witness. These are the events with which Mark’s proclamation climaxes (chs 15–16), and for which everything else prepares (8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34; 12:6-8); special stress is placed upon Jesus’ death as the means of salvation from sin (10:45; 14:3-9, 22-24). In Paul’s gospel, too, the death and resurrection of Jesus are central (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:1-4), with the cross occupying the very center (1 Cor 1:17–2:5). Had Christ not risen from the dead, Paul argues, the preaching of the cross would be a waste of time (1 Cor 15:14, 17; cf. Rom 6:3-11). However, now that Christ has risen, his death deserves special emphasis as the place where God provides atonement for sins (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 2 Cor 5:14-21; Eph 1:7). The gospel according to Acts proclaims Jesus’ death (Acts 8:25; 20:24, 28; cf. 10:36-43) and preeminently his resurrection, the event by which he conquered death and was exalted as Lord and coming Judge (10:36-43; 13:32-33; 17:18, 31). According to 1 Peter, the bearers of the gospel (1 Pt 1:12) concentrated, as had the OT prophets, on “the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glory” (1:11; cf. 1:18-19; 2:21-24; 3:18-22).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Power for Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel is much more than a report of past events and an exposition of doctrine. Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 1:17-18 and again in Romans 1:16 that the gospel is “the power of God”—not merely a witness to his power but an <em>expression<\/em> of his power. Thus, it cannot be fettered (2 Tm 2:8-9). “Our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power,” Paul writes in 1 Thessalonians 1:5. His point is not that the gospel was accompanied by mighty works (though this happened; cf. Rom 15:18-19), but that the gospel itself is a mighty work. God makes it so through his Holy Spirit (Rom 15:18-19; 1 Cor 2:1-5; 1 Thes 1:6). Furthermore, God’s singular purpose in exercising his power is to change people’s lives, to liberate them from sin and death, and to reconcile them to himself—in short, to save them. The gospel has power to effect the salvation it announces and to impart the life it promises (e.g., Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-18; 15:1-2; Eph 1:13; 2 Thes 2:13-14; 2 Tm 1:8-11; 1 Pt 1:23-25). If people are to experience salvation, they must hear and believe the gospel. It is precisely in and through this message that the saving power manifested in the person and work of Christ (especially in his death and resurrection) is conveyed to men and made effective in their lives. Similarly it is in association with the gospel, or as a direct result of the reception of the gospel, that the Holy Spirit is imparted to believers (Acts 10:36-44; 15:7-8; 2 Cor 11:4; Gal 3:1-2). In short, the gospel is the decisive place of encounter between the sinner and God the Savior.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>According to Peter’s testimony at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:7-11), an essential part of the gospel—for Gentiles and Jews alike—is salvation “through the grace of the Lord Jesus.” Toward the close of his missionary career, Paul states that his basic concern has been “to testify to the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24, <span>rsv<\/span>). This statement can be understood only in relation to Paul’s concept of the righteousness of God, particularly as set forth in Romans. Paul is here not merely expounding a divine attribute. Rather, he is dramatizing a divine activity—the manifestation of God’s righteousness now, “in the present time” (Rom 3:26), in the new age inaugurated by the coming of Jesus. The manifestation is twofold. Viewing the two aspects together, and doing so in the light of the gospel declared by Isaiah and by Jesus (both of whom strongly influenced Paul), respectively, will help us to understand why Paul speaks of “the gospel of the grace of God.”<\/p>\n<p>First, the gospel is a <em>witness<\/em> to God’s grace. In offering his Son as a sacrifice for sins (Rom 3:25a), God demonstrates his righteousness (vv 25b-26). That is, in the death of Jesus sins formerly “passed over” (v 25c) become the object of God’s wrath (cf. 1:18) and judgment. Yet in the very place where God deals justly and decisively with sins, he shows his grace to sinners. For the judgment against sin is focused not upon the sinners themselves but upon the One appointed to act on their behalf and to stand in their place (Rom 4:25; 5:6, 11; cf. 2 Cor 5:21; Gal 3:13). On this basis, sinners are freely pardoned (Rom 3:24). “The grace of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 15:11) toward the sinful is also in evidence, for he willingly bears their iniquities and suffers the consequences of their wrongdoing (Gal 2:20; cf. 2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the gospel is a <em>channel<\/em> of God’s grace. “The righteousness of God is revealed” in the gospel, says Paul (Rom 1:17). By this he means, not that the gospel talks about the righteousness of God (though it does), but that God’s righteousness is actively at work in the gospel. This activity in turn explains how the gospel becomes “the power of God for salvation” (v 16). And just how does God demonstrate his righteousness at this stage? In short, by bestowing it as a free gift on sinful human beings. It remains the righteousness of God, but by God’s grace, it is a righteousness in which humans may share. Furthermore, partaking of God’s righteousness depends on being personally united with Jesus Christ. In Paul’s view the saved person is one who has been acquitted, justified, “declared righteous” by God the judge. The basis for the verdict is not that I in myself am righteous (God justifies the ungodly, Rom 4:5). Nor does God treat me as though I were righteous. According to Paul I am declared righteous because I really <em>am<\/em> righteous—not in myself but in Christ (1 Cor 1:30; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9). This union is established through the revelation—and the free offer—of God’s righteousness in the gospel (Rom 1:16-17).<\/p>\n<h5>Responding to the Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel calls for a threefold response:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>Believing.<\/em> The gospel, says Paul, is “the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith” (Rom 1:16). For Paul, faith is the abandonment of all reliance upon “works of law” for justification (3:28) and utter dependence upon the grace of God as demonstrated in the work of Christ, especially his death (v 25). Accordingly, the “different gospel” of Galatians 1:6 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is spurious, for it preaches salvation by personal merit rather than (or together with) the work of Christ (cf. Gal 2:16). Ultimately faith rests upon God (Rom 4:24; 1 Thes 1:8-9) and upon Christ (Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 2:16, 20). Yet it is imperative that one believe the gospel also (Acts 8:12; 11:20-21; 15:7; Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-24; Phil 1:27; Heb 4:2), for it is just by this means that God’s salvation is made known and mediated. Moreover, believing the gospel entails repentance (Acts 14:15; 20:21, 24; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and obedience (Rom 1:5; 15:16-18; Heb 4:6). Those who refuse to obey the gospel are imperiling their lives (2 Thes 1:5-10; 1 Pt 4:17).<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Growing.<\/em> The Gospel is more than a message to be received—it is also a place in which to stand (1 Cor 15:1-2). It is sustainer of life as well as giver of life. One grows as a Christian not by turning from the gospel to other things (to turn away from the gospel is to abandon God and Christ, Gal 1:6), but by going ever more deeply into the gospel. In Romans 1:15 Paul expresses his eagerness to proclaim the gospel to the Christians in Rome. In the following chapters, anticipating his visit, he offers one of his most profound expositions of the gospel—one whose truth has never been fathomed and whose power has never been exhausted.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Hoping.<\/em> “The hope of the gospel” (Col 1:23) includes not only the return of Christ and the glory of heaven (Col 1:5; 3:1-4; 2 Thes 2:14-16) but the final judgment as well. For those who embrace the gospel, the last judgment holds no terrors, because the Judge is the very one who rescues them from the wrath to come (1 Thes 1:10). Those who are united to him need not dread condemnation now or at the end (Rom 8:1). Instead, the last judgment will mark their final vindication (1 Cor 4:5; Gal 5:5). Accordingly, this theme is not just a corollary but an integral part of the Good News (Rom 2:16). Those who have died since believing the gospel (1 Pt 4:6) may seem to have suffered a fate common to all people, or even the condemnation reserved for the lawless; in fact, their response to the gospel assures them of approval by the coming Lord (4:5-6; 5:4) and of a share in the imperishable inheritance of heaven (1:4).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GOSPEL<\/h3>\n<p>Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon <em>godspell<\/em> denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelMessageofIsaiah\">The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his saving action except in his own nature. Israel’s deliverance is undeserved; she is no more worthy of the divine love now than when she went into captivity. In whatever measure she has paid the just due for her past sins (Is 40:2), she remains a sinful people (42:25; 46:12-13; 48:1). It is only by God’s grace that she is saved (55:1-7). By God’s design, Israel’s salvation depends not upon her own righteousness but upon his (41:10; 45:24; 46:13; 51:5-6). There being no righteousness to reward, the Lord acts to <em>create<\/em> righteousness in Israel (45:8; 61:3, 10-11). Yet as these references indicate, salvation is not accomplished at the expense of justice. The penalty for Israel’s sins is to be paid in full. God’s mercy is not hereby called into question. On the contrary, it is precisely here that his mercy is most poignantly expressed, for the penalty is exacted not from his people but from the Servant appointed to stand in their place (53:4-12). Through the Servant’s work, many shall be justified (53:11). The coming of the Evangelist—the preacher of the good news—is predicted in Isaiah 61. He is called the anointed One (v 1) who proclaims the year of the Lord’s favor (v 2). God will be glorified through his preaching (v 3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelintheNewTestament\">The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In only two places (Gal 3:8; Heb 4:2, 6) does the NT speak of the proclamation of the gospel prior to the Christian era. This is quite remarkable, given (1) the unmistakable presence of the gospel in the OT, (2) the extent of gospel terminology in the NT (in the Greek the noun appears 76 times; and the verb, 54), and (3) the fact that the NT presents Christ as the fulfillment of the OT and draws heavily on the OT to interpret his person and work. Not only is it remarkable; it is very significant. It indicates that the NT usage depends not only upon the <em>character<\/em> of the message (truth about salvation) but also upon <em>historical events.<\/em> Almost without exception, the NT restricts its application of gospel terminology to proclamations made during the time of fulfillment—the age in which the salvation promised in the OT is actually accomplished. The NT is preoccupied, not with promises of salvation, but with news of salvation. According to Mark 1:1-4, the gospel “begins” not in the OT but with John the Baptist, in whose work OT prophecy is fulfilled. In Romans 1:1-5 the gospel is represented as a blessing promised in the OT but not actually given until Jesus comes (see also Acts 13:32-33).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGoodNewsofChristsComing\">The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>The promised birth of John the Baptist is good news (Lk 1:19), not only for his parents (vv 7, 24-25) but for all the people: John is sent to prepare them for Messiah’s coming (vv 14-17, 67-79). John’s own preaching is gospel (3:18) for the same reason. The Messiah would be coming to execute judgment, a process that involves both condemnation and salvation (vv 3-17). John’s message is gospel for sinners in that they are warned of impending doom and urged to repent before the ax falls (vv 7-9); it is gospel for the repentant in that they are promised forgiveness (v 3) and membership in Messiah’s community (v 17). The birth of the Savior himself is announced as good news bringing great joy (2:10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelaccordingtoJesus\">The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Kingdom of God<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was authorized by God and anointed by the Spirit to proclaim the gospel (Mk 1:14; Lk 4:18). At the heart of his preaching stands the announcement “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel” (Mk 1:15). (For further references to this gospel, see Mt 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; 26:13; Mk 8:35; 10:29; 13:10; 14:9; Lk 4:43; 8:1; 16:16.) The message is good news for several reasons: (1) The kingdom is coming. The God whom Jesus proclaims is sovereign over all he has made. Yet paradoxically his rule is incomplete: his will is not done on earth as it is in heaven; wrong, not right, prevails. But these conditions are not final, according to Jesus. With the coming of the kingdom, God’s rule will be completed; wrong will be judged, righteousness established, and his people blessed. (2) The kingdom is <em>now<\/em> being inaugurated. “The time is fulfilled,” declares Jesus (Mk 1:15a). The time appointed for the fulfillment of the OT promises has arrived. (3) The consummation of the kingdom is therefore no longer a distant prospect; the full realization of God’s rule is “at hand” (Mk 1:15b). (4) God is establishing his rule for a saving purpose. This is implied in Jesus’ call to repentance (Mk 1:15c). It is especially clear in the passages to which we now turn.<\/p>\n<h5>The Salvation of the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Invited to read the Scripture in the synagogue at Nazareth, Jesus turns to Isaiah 61: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord” (Lk 4:18-19, <span>rsv<\/span>). Having read the prophecy, Jesus announces its fulfillment in his own ministry (v 21). Included among those whom Jesus has come to free are the physically infirm, such as the blind (v 18) and the leprous (v 27) (cf. the references to healing miracles in vv 23, 33-41; the close connection between evangelizing and healing in Mt 4:23; 9:35; 11:5; Lk 7:21-22; 9:6; and the description in Mt 12:22-29; Lk 13:11-16, of the physically afflicted as captives of Satan now liberated by Jesus). Also included are the materially poor—people like the widow helped by Elijah during the famine (Lk 4:25-26). It is the literally poor and hungry whom Jesus pronounces “blessed” in Luke 6:20-21. Yet it is primarily “spiritual” poverty that is in view. Still applying Isaiah 61, Jesus speaks in Matthew 5:3 of the “poor in spirit.” These are people broken and grieved by misery and poverty, oppression and injustice, suffering and death, national apostasy and personal sin—people who in their extremity turn to God and longingly wait for him to bring forth justice, bestow his mercy, and establish his kingdom. It is to just such people that Jesus brings good news (Mt 5:3-10). God sent him to usher in the kingdom, to rescue the lost, to liberate the enslaved, to cure the afflicted, to bind up hearts that are broken, and to forgive the guilty (Mk 2:5, 10, 17; 10:45; Lk 4:18-21; 7:48-49; 15:1-32; 19:10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gift of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>The coming of the kingdom is not the effect or the reward of human effort but God’s answer to the human predicament—the gift of his favor (Lk 12:32). Correspondingly, the explanation for the salvation of the poor lies nowhere but in God’s own character. As the prodigal himself recognized, he hardly deserved to be his father’s servant, much less his son. Nothing he did, not even his repentance, accounted for the father’s love (15:11-32). In the parable of Matthew 20:1-16, it is owing entirely to the goodness of the employer that the last workers to be hired receive a full day’s wages. The first debtor in the story of Matthew 18:23-35 earned nothing but the right to be sold into slavery; instead, the king canceled his enormous debt. The publican, who had nothing to offer God but a confession of sin and plea for mercy, went home justified (Lk 18:13-14). The same holds true for the more virtuous among the poor, such as the persons described in Matthew 5:7-10. Their virtue is real, not imagined. Yet in keeping God’s commands, they do not put him in their debt; they are simply doing their duty (Lk 17:7-10). Furthermore, even the most merciful need divine mercy (Mt 5:7). For even those most zealous to obey God’s law are unable to fulfill all its requirements (cf. 11:28-30). The first servant in Matthew 18:23-35 owes far more money than someone in such a situation could possibly pay—which serves to magnify the generosity of the king. Grace depends for its exercise upon the inability of its objects (Lk 14:12-14).<\/p>\n<h5>The Call to Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The Israelites are without exception a sinful people, all of them needing the salvation that Jesus brings (Mt 1:21; Lk 1:77). In demonstration of God’s grace, Jesus proclaimed his gospel to the entire nation (Mt 4:23; 9:35; 15:24; Lk 4:43; 9:6; 20:1). From the most respectable to the least, all are summoned to submit to God’s rule, all are invited to come and partake freely of the banquet he has spread (Lk 14:16-24). But the gift of salvation must be received if it is to be experienced (Mk 10:15). And while it is indeed a gift that costs nothing, it is also a priceless treasure for which a wise person will freely sacrifice everything else (Mt 13:44-46), a sacrifice exceeded only by the cost of rejecting the gospel (Mt 11:20-24; Mk 8:34-39; Lk 14:24, 33). “Repent and believe in the gospel,” Jesus commands (Mk 1:15). The self-righteous and the self-sufficient must be jolted out of their false sense of security and humbly recognize their need for God (Lk 6:24-26). Only then will Jesus’ message to the poor be seen as gospel. An announcement of liberation (4:18-19) is good news only to people who are enslaved and know they are. The command applies also to the destitute and the afflicted. Those among them who bemoan their lot must repent of their sins. But something further is needed for the response to be complete: a person cannot believe Jesus’ gospel without a commitment to the <em>Person<\/em> of Christ (Jn 3:16). Even those who are already “poor in spirit,” in the sense defined earlier, are not really “blessed” until they acknowledge the truth of Jesus’ claims (Mt 11:6) and commit themselves to a life of obedience on his terms (7:21-27). This prepares us for the next point.<\/p>\n<h5>Summary<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout Jesus’ earthly ministry, the theme of his gospel remains the dawning of God’s kingdom (Mt 4:23; 24:14; Lk 4:43; 16:16), a message that is preached almost exclusively to Jews (Mt 10:5-6; 15:24). Yet Jesus also provides glimpses into what the gospel was to become once his work on earth was accomplished: (1) In Mark 8:35 and 10:29 Jesus speaks of individuals who needed to make great sacrifices “for my sake and for the gospel.” While distinguished from each other, the person of Jesus and the gospel are here associated in the closest possible way. The time was approaching when the Proclaimer of the gospel would become the Proclaimed. (2) In Mark 13:10 and Matthew 24:14 (and the textually doubtful Mk 16:15) Jesus foretells the preaching of the gospel of the kingdom to the gentile nations. (3) In Mark 14, having interpreted a woman’s action (v 3) as an anointing of his body beforehand for burial (v 8), Jesus declares, “And truly, I say to you, wherever the gospel is preached in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her” (v 9, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 26:13). This statement strongly implies that both the person of Jesus and the event of his death will figure prominently in the message that is to be proclaimed; otherwise, it is strange that the gospel and this particular act should be so solemnly bound together. Thus, here in the text already is an indication of how crucial Jesus’ death is both for the provision of the salvation announced in his gospel (cf. Mk 14:22-24) and for the launching of the evangelistic mission to the Gentiles (Mt 20:28 is vital for explaining the shift from Mt 15:24 to 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelafterJesusResurrection\">The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p>After the resurrection of Jesus, the gospel was proclaimed by his eyewitnesses. The contents of this gospel are recorded in the book of Acts and in Paul’s letters. Of the 43 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelizomai<\/span> (“evangelize”) beyond the Gospels, 15 occur in Acts and 21 in Paul’s writings; of the 64 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelion<\/span> (“gospel”), 2 occur in Acts and no fewer than 60 in Paul.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Having risen from the dead, Jesus Christ again evangelizes (Eph 2:16-17), doing so now through his appointed representatives (Rom 15:16-18; 1 Cor 1:17; 9:12-18; Gal 4:13-14; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:9-11). More than that, Christ has become the central theme of the gospel; the Proclaimer is now the Proclaimed. This is repeatedly affirmed in Acts (5:42; 8:4-5, 35; 11:20; 17:18) and in Paul’s writings (Rom 1:1-4; 10:8-17; 15:19-20; 2 Cor 4:4-6; 11:4; Gal 1:16; Eph 3:8; Phil 1:15-18; 2 Tm 2:8). The NT always speaks of <em>the gospel<\/em>—never the gospels—of Christ. A second gospel is as inconceivable and as unnecessary as a second Christ. This is the one gospel that God authorizes (e.g., Rom 1:1-17) and proclaims (e.g., 2 Thes 2:13-14). Galatians 2:7-9 speaks not of two gospels but of two mission fields. Paul (the apostle to the uncircumcised) and Peter (the apostle to the circumcised) are both entrusted with “the gospel of Christ” (Gal 1:7; cf. 1 Cor 15:1-11), the message that God has ordained for the salvation of Jews and Gentiles alike (Rom 1:16). The “different gospel” that Paul denounces in Galatians 1:6-9 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is not another gospel about Jesus but a message about “another Jesus”—not the real one, but one who exists only in the minds and the messages of those who proclaim him. To preach the true Christ is to preach the true gospel, however questionable one’s motives (Phil 1:15-18, 27), and to respond rightly to the gospel is to turn to Christ (Acts 11:20-21; Rom 10:8-17; Gal 2:14-16).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Witness to Saving Events<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel bears witness to every aspect of Christ’s saving work, from his birth (Rom 1:3; 2 Tm 2:8) and public ministry (Mk 1:1; Acts 10:36-38) to his second coming (Col 1:5, 23; cf. 3:1-4; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and the last judgment (Rom 2:16). But it is the death and the resurrection of Christ that are most crucial for the accomplishment of salvation, and that are therefore most prominent in the gospel’s witness. These are the events with which Mark’s proclamation climaxes (chs 15–16), and for which everything else prepares (8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34; 12:6-8); special stress is placed upon Jesus’ death as the means of salvation from sin (10:45; 14:3-9, 22-24). In Paul’s gospel, too, the death and resurrection of Jesus are central (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:1-4), with the cross occupying the very center (1 Cor 1:17–2:5). Had Christ not risen from the dead, Paul argues, the preaching of the cross would be a waste of time (1 Cor 15:14, 17; cf. Rom 6:3-11). However, now that Christ has risen, his death deserves special emphasis as the place where God provides atonement for sins (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 2 Cor 5:14-21; Eph 1:7). The gospel according to Acts proclaims Jesus’ death (Acts 8:25; 20:24, 28; cf. 10:36-43) and preeminently his resurrection, the event by which he conquered death and was exalted as Lord and coming Judge (10:36-43; 13:32-33; 17:18, 31). According to 1 Peter, the bearers of the gospel (1 Pt 1:12) concentrated, as had the OT prophets, on “the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glory” (1:11; cf. 1:18-19; 2:21-24; 3:18-22).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Power for Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel is much more than a report of past events and an exposition of doctrine. Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 1:17-18 and again in Romans 1:16 that the gospel is “the power of God”—not merely a witness to his power but an <em>expression<\/em> of his power. Thus, it cannot be fettered (2 Tm 2:8-9). “Our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power,” Paul writes in 1 Thessalonians 1:5. His point is not that the gospel was accompanied by mighty works (though this happened; cf. Rom 15:18-19), but that the gospel itself is a mighty work. God makes it so through his Holy Spirit (Rom 15:18-19; 1 Cor 2:1-5; 1 Thes 1:6). Furthermore, God’s singular purpose in exercising his power is to change people’s lives, to liberate them from sin and death, and to reconcile them to himself—in short, to save them. The gospel has power to effect the salvation it announces and to impart the life it promises (e.g., Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-18; 15:1-2; Eph 1:13; 2 Thes 2:13-14; 2 Tm 1:8-11; 1 Pt 1:23-25). If people are to experience salvation, they must hear and believe the gospel. It is precisely in and through this message that the saving power manifested in the person and work of Christ (especially in his death and resurrection) is conveyed to men and made effective in their lives. Similarly it is in association with the gospel, or as a direct result of the reception of the gospel, that the Holy Spirit is imparted to believers (Acts 10:36-44; 15:7-8; 2 Cor 11:4; Gal 3:1-2). In short, the gospel is the decisive place of encounter between the sinner and God the Savior.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>According to Peter’s testimony at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:7-11), an essential part of the gospel—for Gentiles and Jews alike—is salvation “through the grace of the Lord Jesus.” Toward the close of his missionary career, Paul states that his basic concern has been “to testify to the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24, <span>rsv<\/span>). This statement can be understood only in relation to Paul’s concept of the righteousness of God, particularly as set forth in Romans. Paul is here not merely expounding a divine attribute. Rather, he is dramatizing a divine activity—the manifestation of God’s righteousness now, “in the present time” (Rom 3:26), in the new age inaugurated by the coming of Jesus. The manifestation is twofold. Viewing the two aspects together, and doing so in the light of the gospel declared by Isaiah and by Jesus (both of whom strongly influenced Paul), respectively, will help us to understand why Paul speaks of “the gospel of the grace of God.”<\/p>\n<p>First, the gospel is a <em>witness<\/em> to God’s grace. In offering his Son as a sacrifice for sins (Rom 3:25a), God demonstrates his righteousness (vv 25b-26). That is, in the death of Jesus sins formerly “passed over” (v 25c) become the object of God’s wrath (cf. 1:18) and judgment. Yet in the very place where God deals justly and decisively with sins, he shows his grace to sinners. For the judgment against sin is focused not upon the sinners themselves but upon the One appointed to act on their behalf and to stand in their place (Rom 4:25; 5:6, 11; cf. 2 Cor 5:21; Gal 3:13). On this basis, sinners are freely pardoned (Rom 3:24). “The grace of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 15:11) toward the sinful is also in evidence, for he willingly bears their iniquities and suffers the consequences of their wrongdoing (Gal 2:20; cf. 2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the gospel is a <em>channel<\/em> of God’s grace. “The righteousness of God is revealed” in the gospel, says Paul (Rom 1:17). By this he means, not that the gospel talks about the righteousness of God (though it does), but that God’s righteousness is actively at work in the gospel. This activity in turn explains how the gospel becomes “the power of God for salvation” (v 16). And just how does God demonstrate his righteousness at this stage? In short, by bestowing it as a free gift on sinful human beings. It remains the righteousness of God, but by God’s grace, it is a righteousness in which humans may share. Furthermore, partaking of God’s righteousness depends on being personally united with Jesus Christ. In Paul’s view the saved person is one who has been acquitted, justified, “declared righteous” by God the judge. The basis for the verdict is not that I in myself am righteous (God justifies the ungodly, Rom 4:5). Nor does God treat me as though I were righteous. According to Paul I am declared righteous because I really <em>am<\/em> righteous—not in myself but in Christ (1 Cor 1:30; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9). This union is established through the revelation—and the free offer—of God’s righteousness in the gospel (Rom 1:16-17).<\/p>\n<h5>Responding to the Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel calls for a threefold response:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>Believing.<\/em> The gospel, says Paul, is “the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith” (Rom 1:16). For Paul, faith is the abandonment of all reliance upon “works of law” for justification (3:28) and utter dependence upon the grace of God as demonstrated in the work of Christ, especially his death (v 25). Accordingly, the “different gospel” of Galatians 1:6 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is spurious, for it preaches salvation by personal merit rather than (or together with) the work of Christ (cf. Gal 2:16). Ultimately faith rests upon God (Rom 4:24; 1 Thes 1:8-9) and upon Christ (Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 2:16, 20). Yet it is imperative that one believe the gospel also (Acts 8:12; 11:20-21; 15:7; Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-24; Phil 1:27; Heb 4:2), for it is just by this means that God’s salvation is made known and mediated. Moreover, believing the gospel entails repentance (Acts 14:15; 20:21, 24; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and obedience (Rom 1:5; 15:16-18; Heb 4:6). Those who refuse to obey the gospel are imperiling their lives (2 Thes 1:5-10; 1 Pt 4:17).<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Growing.<\/em> The Gospel is more than a message to be received—it is also a place in which to stand (1 Cor 15:1-2). It is sustainer of life as well as giver of life. One grows as a Christian not by turning from the gospel to other things (to turn away from the gospel is to abandon God and Christ, Gal 1:6), but by going ever more deeply into the gospel. In Romans 1:15 Paul expresses his eagerness to proclaim the gospel to the Christians in Rome. In the following chapters, anticipating his visit, he offers one of his most profound expositions of the gospel—one whose truth has never been fathomed and whose power has never been exhausted.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Hoping.<\/em> “The hope of the gospel” (Col 1:23) includes not only the return of Christ and the glory of heaven (Col 1:5; 3:1-4; 2 Thes 2:14-16) but the final judgment as well. For those who embrace the gospel, the last judgment holds no terrors, because the Judge is the very one who rescues them from the wrath to come (1 Thes 1:10). Those who are united to him need not dread condemnation now or at the end (Rom 8:1). Instead, the last judgment will mark their final vindication (1 Cor 4:5; Gal 5:5). Accordingly, this theme is not just a corollary but an integral part of the Good News (Rom 2:16). Those who have died since believing the gospel (1 Pt 4:6) may seem to have suffered a fate common to all people, or even the condemnation reserved for the lawless; in fact, their response to the gospel assures them of approval by the coming Lord (4:5-6; 5:4) and of a share in the imperishable inheritance of heaven (1:4).<\/p>","summary_ro":"GOSPEL Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon godspell denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.” Preview • The Gospel Message of Isaiah • The Gospel in the New Testament • The Good News of Christ’s Coming • The Gospel according to Jesus • The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection The Gospel Message of Isaiah Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his...","summary_en":"GOSPEL Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon godspell denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.” Preview • The Gospel Message of Isaiah • The Gospel in the New Testament • The Good News of Christ’s Coming • The Gospel according to Jesus • The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection The Gospel Message of Isaiah Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":30839,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Biblical Poetry","title_en":"Biblical Poetry","content_ro":"<h3>POETRY, B<span>iblical<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Poetic language in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT contains all that we know of the poetry of Israel, and what we have occupies an important place in that literature. It was presumably well known throughout the ancient Near East, for its fame had spread even to Babylon (Ps 137:3). Much of the OT is poetic in spirit and structure—a feature of the prophetic writings as well as the poetic literature. In the former are found passages of elevated poetry, studded with brilliant gems of imagery. The movement is rhythmical, with meter, parallelism, and strophic arrangement, as in the poetry books.<\/p>\n<p>The English Revised Version of the Bible (1881) first rendered a great service to English readers by printing OT poetry in parallel lines. Where this is not done in the prophetic literature, the poetic quality of these books is obscured. Note that besides the OT books recognized as poetry—the Psalms, Job, Lamentations, Song of Songs, and Proverbs—Ecclesiastes and the Prophets consist of prose and poetry. The historical books also contain fine examples of poetry.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew language was an ideal instrument for expressing poetic speech. Its simplicity of form combined intensity of feeling and pictorial power and allowed great play of imagination. Figures, metaphors, and hyperboles are extremely common. In its powerful imagery the genius of Hebrew poetry comes to its finest expression.<\/p>\n<p>The normal unit of Hebrew verse is the couplet of two parallel lines. But this is not the only grouping of lines in Hebrew poetry. Units of three (Pss 1:1; 5:11; 45:1-2), four (Pss 1:3; 55:21; Prv 27:15-16), five (Ps 6:6-7; Prv 24:23-25), six (Ps 99:1-3; Prv 30:21-23), and even larger combinations of parallel lines occur.<\/p>\n<p>As far as can be determined, meter is absent from biblical poetry. Certainly there is little concern for the careful meter that marks classic Greek and Latin, as well as much of English, poetry. The only exception is found in wailing songs or laments (Jer 9:18-20; Lam 1–4). This is called the lamentation meter, where the verse is in two parts. Rhyme also is so rare as to be almost nonexistent.<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, Hebrew poetry is rhythmical—one of its distinguishing features. Its rhythm recurs with stressed and unstressed syllables in relatively regular succession. There are usually three or four accents or beats to a line, but the rhythmic unit is not uniform. Rhythm in Hebrew poetry, however, is not confined to the balance of accents or beats in a line. The meaning of the words and their position in the line are also significant—a feature called parallelism. This distinguishing characteristic was first clearly recognized by Dr. Robert Lowth, who in 1753 developed the principle of parallelism.<\/p>\n<p>He distinguished three types. The first is <em>synonymous parallelism,<\/em> where the thought expressed in the first part of the verse is repeated in the second part, in different but equivalent terms (Pss 2:4; 19:1; 36:1-2; 103:11-12; Prv 3:13-18). The second is <em>antithetic parallelism,<\/em> where the thought in the first part of the verse is contrasted with its opposite in the second (Ps 1:6; Prv 10:1-4, 16-18; 13:9). The third is <em>synthetic parallelism,<\/em> where the idea expressed in the first line of a verse is developed and completed in the following lines (Pss 1:1; 3:5-6; 18:8-10; Prv 26:3). There are more complicated forms of parallelism, but these three are the most common.<\/p>\n<p>Another characteristic of biblical poetry is the use of the letters of the Hebrew alphabet. Psalms in which verses are linked together by this means are called acrostic. Today, an acrostic is formed by taking a name and beginning the successive lines of the short poem with the letters that make up the name. The Hebrews took only the alphabet and arranged the lines of the poem according to the succession of the letters.<\/p>\n<p>Each line of a psalm may begin with a different letter, as in Psalm 25. Or each of the stanzas may begin with the same letter until all 22 letters of the alphabet are exhausted, as in Psalm 119. However, this psalm, which is the most conspicuous example of a Hebrew acrostic poem, is quite complicated in its arrangement. Not only does each stanza begin with a letter, but each of the eight lines of every stanza begins with the same letter, so that eight alphabetic arrangements move through the psalm in parallel lines. Other elaborate acrostics are Psalms 9, 10, 34, 37, 111, 112, and 145.<\/p>\n<p>The first four chapters of Lamentations also follow an acrostic arrangement. This example of acrostic arrangement is less noticeable to the English reader because the names of the Hebrew letters do not mark the beginning of the stanzas. In Lamentations 3 each letter of the alphabet begins three successive lines numbered as verses. Another acrostic occurs in Proverbs 31:10-31. It is an alphabetic description of the virtuous woman.<\/p>\n<p>Another poetic device giving unity to a poem and marking its divisions is the refrain. Psalm 136 is an outstanding example of this arrangement. The refrain is “His faithful love endures forever” and is used to conclude every verse.<\/p>\n<p>The meter of Hebraic poetry is dependent on accentuation; the unit is the couplet, in which the members may be of equal or varying length. Couplets are often arranged into strophes. The fundamental category of Hebrew poetry is the song or lyric. The song was accompanied by music (Gn 31:27; Ex 15:20; 1 Chr 25:6; Is 23:16; 30:29; Am 6:5) and could be associated with dance (Ex 15:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>Some complete poems in the OT are embedded in the narrative books and represent various types of Hebrew poems. The first recorded poem in the Bible is a battle song (Gn 4:23-24). Other famous examples of this type are the Song of Moses (Ex 15:1-18) and the Song of Deborah (Jgs 5:1-31). Then there is the Taunt Song (Nm 21:27-30), the Song of the Well (vv 17-18), and songs of blessing. Of this latter type, well-known examples are the Blessing of Jacob (Gn 49:1-27), the Blessing of Moses (Dt 33:2-29), and the four Blessings of Balaam (Nm 23:7-10; 23:18-24; 24:3-9; 24:15-24). There are also laments for the dead (2 Sm 1:19-27) and didactic poems that warn against improvidence (Prv 6:6-11) and drunkenness (23:29-35). Common throughout all of these various types of poems is religious emotion and fervor. The songs of Moses and Deborah praise God as the giver of victory.<\/p>\n<p>Most poems of distinctively religious fervor characterize the worship of the sanctuary. The psalms are religious poems sung with musical accompaniment. Many are private prayers, while others were composed for public worship, especially hymns of thanksgiving sung at the tabernacle or temple. It is in the Psalter that the soaring spirit of Hebrew poetry rises to a level never achieved by Israel’s pagan neighbors; the Hebrews worshiped God in spirit and in truth, and as they did so, they were giving expression to a personal experience of the living God in their soul.<\/p>\n<p>The internal qualities of Hebrew poetry are in part influenced by the age, social conditions, and environment in which the writers lived. Although the OT is of divine authorship, it also comes within the scope of literature and should be appreciated as such. Though the Holy Spirit inspired the message of the Hebrew writers, their individual writing styles remain clearly evident. Using simple and vivid diction, figures of speech, and literary devices, each poet expressed a wealth of religious thought, experience, and emotion; simile, metaphor, allegory, hyperbole, personification, irony, and wordplay all variously enhanced each writer’s pattern of thinking. Hebrew poetry is the expression of the poet’s human spirit, and it is the literature of revelation—the Word of God to humankind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT has a limited number of poetical passages. Probably the NT contains less poetry than the OT (relatively speaking) because the early Christians found the OT Psalter (in the Hebrew and LXX) adequate for their devotional purposes. All the writers of the NT were Jews, except Luke. He has given us some memorable poems: the Magnificat (Lk 1:46-55), the Benedictus (vv 68-79), and the Nunc Dimittis (2:29-32). Interestingly, these poems are strongly Hebraic in form, character, and content. Matthew has given us the poetic Beatitudes (Mt 5:3-12). These Beatitudes have the parallelism that is common in OT poetry—specifically, synthetic parallelism (where the second line of each verse completes the meaning of the first line). There is also a definite rhythmic quality in Matthew 11:28-30. John’s Prologue to his Gospel of John (1:1-18) is a fine example of Hellenistic poetry.<\/p>\n<p>The NT Epistles contain a number of poetic passages, especially in the doxologies (see, for example, Rom 16:25-27; Jude 1:24-25). Other sections are distinctly poetry and\/or early Christian hymns. These include Philippians 2:6-11 (“The Humility of Christ” hymn\/ poem); Colossians 1:15-20 (“The Preeminence of Christ” hymn\/poem); and 1 Timothy 3:16 (“The Incarnation” hymn\/poem). The writer to Hebrews also produced a noteworthy poetic prologue (1:1-3). Other sections of Paul’s writings display poetic language, where rhythm and exalted diction are prominent (see, for example, 1 Cor 13; 15:54-57).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Revelation also contains a number of poems of praise as well as hymns (see Rv 5:9-10, 12-13; 7:12; 11:17-18; 15:3-4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ecclesiastes, Book of; Job, Book of; Lamentations, Book of; Music; Proverbs, Book of; Psalms, Book of; Song of Solomon; Wisdom; Wisdom Literature.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>POETRY, B<span>iblical<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Poetic language in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT contains all that we know of the poetry of Israel, and what we have occupies an important place in that literature. It was presumably well known throughout the ancient Near East, for its fame had spread even to Babylon (Ps 137:3). Much of the OT is poetic in spirit and structure—a feature of the prophetic writings as well as the poetic literature. In the former are found passages of elevated poetry, studded with brilliant gems of imagery. The movement is rhythmical, with meter, parallelism, and strophic arrangement, as in the poetry books.<\/p>\n<p>The English Revised Version of the Bible (1881) first rendered a great service to English readers by printing OT poetry in parallel lines. Where this is not done in the prophetic literature, the poetic quality of these books is obscured. Note that besides the OT books recognized as poetry—the Psalms, Job, Lamentations, Song of Songs, and Proverbs—Ecclesiastes and the Prophets consist of prose and poetry. The historical books also contain fine examples of poetry.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew language was an ideal instrument for expressing poetic speech. Its simplicity of form combined intensity of feeling and pictorial power and allowed great play of imagination. Figures, metaphors, and hyperboles are extremely common. In its powerful imagery the genius of Hebrew poetry comes to its finest expression.<\/p>\n<p>The normal unit of Hebrew verse is the couplet of two parallel lines. But this is not the only grouping of lines in Hebrew poetry. Units of three (Pss 1:1; 5:11; 45:1-2), four (Pss 1:3; 55:21; Prv 27:15-16), five (Ps 6:6-7; Prv 24:23-25), six (Ps 99:1-3; Prv 30:21-23), and even larger combinations of parallel lines occur.<\/p>\n<p>As far as can be determined, meter is absent from biblical poetry. Certainly there is little concern for the careful meter that marks classic Greek and Latin, as well as much of English, poetry. The only exception is found in wailing songs or laments (Jer 9:18-20; Lam 1–4). This is called the lamentation meter, where the verse is in two parts. Rhyme also is so rare as to be almost nonexistent.<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, Hebrew poetry is rhythmical—one of its distinguishing features. Its rhythm recurs with stressed and unstressed syllables in relatively regular succession. There are usually three or four accents or beats to a line, but the rhythmic unit is not uniform. Rhythm in Hebrew poetry, however, is not confined to the balance of accents or beats in a line. The meaning of the words and their position in the line are also significant—a feature called parallelism. This distinguishing characteristic was first clearly recognized by Dr. Robert Lowth, who in 1753 developed the principle of parallelism.<\/p>\n<p>He distinguished three types. The first is <em>synonymous parallelism,<\/em> where the thought expressed in the first part of the verse is repeated in the second part, in different but equivalent terms (Pss 2:4; 19:1; 36:1-2; 103:11-12; Prv 3:13-18). The second is <em>antithetic parallelism,<\/em> where the thought in the first part of the verse is contrasted with its opposite in the second (Ps 1:6; Prv 10:1-4, 16-18; 13:9). The third is <em>synthetic parallelism,<\/em> where the idea expressed in the first line of a verse is developed and completed in the following lines (Pss 1:1; 3:5-6; 18:8-10; Prv 26:3). There are more complicated forms of parallelism, but these three are the most common.<\/p>\n<p>Another characteristic of biblical poetry is the use of the letters of the Hebrew alphabet. Psalms in which verses are linked together by this means are called acrostic. Today, an acrostic is formed by taking a name and beginning the successive lines of the short poem with the letters that make up the name. The Hebrews took only the alphabet and arranged the lines of the poem according to the succession of the letters.<\/p>\n<p>Each line of a psalm may begin with a different letter, as in Psalm 25. Or each of the stanzas may begin with the same letter until all 22 letters of the alphabet are exhausted, as in Psalm 119. However, this psalm, which is the most conspicuous example of a Hebrew acrostic poem, is quite complicated in its arrangement. Not only does each stanza begin with a letter, but each of the eight lines of every stanza begins with the same letter, so that eight alphabetic arrangements move through the psalm in parallel lines. Other elaborate acrostics are Psalms 9, 10, 34, 37, 111, 112, and 145.<\/p>\n<p>The first four chapters of Lamentations also follow an acrostic arrangement. This example of acrostic arrangement is less noticeable to the English reader because the names of the Hebrew letters do not mark the beginning of the stanzas. In Lamentations 3 each letter of the alphabet begins three successive lines numbered as verses. Another acrostic occurs in Proverbs 31:10-31. It is an alphabetic description of the virtuous woman.<\/p>\n<p>Another poetic device giving unity to a poem and marking its divisions is the refrain. Psalm 136 is an outstanding example of this arrangement. The refrain is “His faithful love endures forever” and is used to conclude every verse.<\/p>\n<p>The meter of Hebraic poetry is dependent on accentuation; the unit is the couplet, in which the members may be of equal or varying length. Couplets are often arranged into strophes. The fundamental category of Hebrew poetry is the song or lyric. The song was accompanied by music (Gn 31:27; Ex 15:20; 1 Chr 25:6; Is 23:16; 30:29; Am 6:5) and could be associated with dance (Ex 15:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>Some complete poems in the OT are embedded in the narrative books and represent various types of Hebrew poems. The first recorded poem in the Bible is a battle song (Gn 4:23-24). Other famous examples of this type are the Song of Moses (Ex 15:1-18) and the Song of Deborah (Jgs 5:1-31). Then there is the Taunt Song (Nm 21:27-30), the Song of the Well (vv 17-18), and songs of blessing. Of this latter type, well-known examples are the Blessing of Jacob (Gn 49:1-27), the Blessing of Moses (Dt 33:2-29), and the four Blessings of Balaam (Nm 23:7-10; 23:18-24; 24:3-9; 24:15-24). There are also laments for the dead (2 Sm 1:19-27) and didactic poems that warn against improvidence (Prv 6:6-11) and drunkenness (23:29-35). Common throughout all of these various types of poems is religious emotion and fervor. The songs of Moses and Deborah praise God as the giver of victory.<\/p>\n<p>Most poems of distinctively religious fervor characterize the worship of the sanctuary. The psalms are religious poems sung with musical accompaniment. Many are private prayers, while others were composed for public worship, especially hymns of thanksgiving sung at the tabernacle or temple. It is in the Psalter that the soaring spirit of Hebrew poetry rises to a level never achieved by Israel’s pagan neighbors; the Hebrews worshiped God in spirit and in truth, and as they did so, they were giving expression to a personal experience of the living God in their soul.<\/p>\n<p>The internal qualities of Hebrew poetry are in part influenced by the age, social conditions, and environment in which the writers lived. Although the OT is of divine authorship, it also comes within the scope of literature and should be appreciated as such. Though the Holy Spirit inspired the message of the Hebrew writers, their individual writing styles remain clearly evident. Using simple and vivid diction, figures of speech, and literary devices, each poet expressed a wealth of religious thought, experience, and emotion; simile, metaphor, allegory, hyperbole, personification, irony, and wordplay all variously enhanced each writer’s pattern of thinking. Hebrew poetry is the expression of the poet’s human spirit, and it is the literature of revelation—the Word of God to humankind.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT has a limited number of poetical passages. Probably the NT contains less poetry than the OT (relatively speaking) because the early Christians found the OT Psalter (in the Hebrew and LXX) adequate for their devotional purposes. All the writers of the NT were Jews, except Luke. He has given us some memorable poems: the Magnificat (Lk 1:46-55), the Benedictus (vv 68-79), and the Nunc Dimittis (2:29-32). Interestingly, these poems are strongly Hebraic in form, character, and content. Matthew has given us the poetic Beatitudes (Mt 5:3-12). These Beatitudes have the parallelism that is common in OT poetry—specifically, synthetic parallelism (where the second line of each verse completes the meaning of the first line). There is also a definite rhythmic quality in Matthew 11:28-30. John’s Prologue to his Gospel of John (1:1-18) is a fine example of Hellenistic poetry.<\/p>\n<p>The NT Epistles contain a number of poetic passages, especially in the doxologies (see, for example, Rom 16:25-27; Jude 1:24-25). Other sections are distinctly poetry and\/or early Christian hymns. These include Philippians 2:6-11 (“The Humility of Christ” hymn\/ poem); Colossians 1:15-20 (“The Preeminence of Christ” hymn\/poem); and 1 Timothy 3:16 (“The Incarnation” hymn\/poem). The writer to Hebrews also produced a noteworthy poetic prologue (1:1-3). Other sections of Paul’s writings display poetic language, where rhythm and exalted diction are prominent (see, for example, 1 Cor 13; 15:54-57).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Revelation also contains a number of poems of praise as well as hymns (see Rv 5:9-10, 12-13; 7:12; 11:17-18; 15:3-4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ecclesiastes, Book of; Job, Book of; Lamentations, Book of; Music; Proverbs, Book of; Psalms, Book of; Song of Solomon; Wisdom; Wisdom Literature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"POETRY, Biblical Poetic language in Scripture. In the Old Testament The OT contains all that we know of the poetry of Israel, and what we have occupies an important place in that literature. It was presumably well known throughout the ancient Near East, for its fame had spread even to Babylon (Ps 137:3). Much of the OT is poetic in spirit and structure—a feature of the prophetic writings as well as the poetic literature. In the former are found passages of elevated poetry, studded with brilli...","summary_en":"POETRY, Biblical Poetic language in Scripture. In the Old Testament The OT contains all that we know of the poetry of Israel, and what we have occupies an important place in that literature. It was presumably well known throughout the ancient Near East, for its fame had spread even to Babylon (Ps 137:3). Much of the OT is poetic in spirit and structure—a feature of the prophetic writings as well as the poetic literature. In the former are found passages of elevated poetry, studded with brilli...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32773,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Rest","title_en":"Rest","content_ro":"<h3>REST<\/h3>\n<p>Freedom from work or activity. The source of the Christian doctrine of rest is the rest of God himself, who, after completing the work of Creation in six days, “rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done” (Gn 2:2). This provides the basis for the Hebrew Sabbath as the weekly seventh day of rest (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sabbath<\/span> is the Hebrew term for rest), which is presented as an ordinance of Creation. The fourth commandment demands the consecration of the Sabbath day to God and the limitation of labor to six days precisely because God made all things in six days and rested the seventh day (Ex 20:8-11).<\/p>\n<p>The biblical concept of rest, however, is not just past (Creation) and present (weekly) but also future. This future aspect received symbolic expression in the Israelites’ pilgrimage under the leadership of Moses through the wilderness from the bondage of Egypt to the “rest” of the Promised Land. That rest was attained under Joshua, who led them into the land and settled them there (see Jos 23–24).<\/p>\n<p>The 40 years of restless wandering in the wilderness meant that the whole adult generation that set out with Moses perished without entering the Promised Land. This was a judgment they brought upon themselves by their ingratitude and rebelliousness (Nm 14:26-35). Centuries later God warned their descendants against the danger of following this example of hard-heartedness and reaping a similar consequence of not entering his rest: “Today, when you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts” (Ps 95:7-11). The author of Hebrews cites this passage (Heb 3:7-8; 4:7) as evidence that God’s rest is not a matter of past history but that “the promise of entering his rest remains.” The word “today” indicates that the day of grace is not closed: “For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not speak later of another day. So then, there remains a sabbath rest for the people of God” (4:8-9, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>It is <em>God’s<\/em> rest into which all persons are encouraged to enter. The weekly day of rest is a reminder and a reflection of that rest. The rest of the Israelites in the Promised Land after their wilderness wanderings is a symbol of God’s eternal rest that his people will share. The rest that Christ gives to those who come to him (Mt 11:28) is a foretaste and a guarantee of the divine rest that awaits them. The rest after death of believers who have fallen asleep in Christ is a blissful intensification of the reality of this experience: “Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord. . . . They may rest from their labors” (Rv 14:13, <span>rsv<\/span>). But the completion of this rest in its inexpressible fullness will take place at the return of Christ, when at last all who are his will be fully conformed to his likeness (1 Jn 3:2). Salvation will be consummated as they are clothed with imperishable, glorified bodies (2 Cor 5), and the renewed order of creation in which righteousness dwells will be established (2 Pt 3:13).<\/p>\n<p>This will be the climactic point of all history and the moment of the entry of God’s people into the full and unending enjoyment of his rest. The completion of the redemption purchased by Christ at the cross will mean rest and freedom from all sin, and this in turn will mean rest and freedom from all sorrow, pain, suffering, persecution, frustration, injustice, and death (Rv 7:9-17; 21:1-7). The rest of mankind, moreover, will involve the rest of God’s whole creation as it is brought to the perfection of that glorious destiny for which it was intended from the very beginning (cf. Rom 8:19-25).<\/p>\n<p>Rest is not synonymous with inactivity. What God rested from was the work of Creation. He continues constantly to be active, however, in providentially sustaining all that he has created and in the work both of righteous judgment and gracious salvation. Jesus Christ, indeed, in his incarnation, life, death, rising, and glorification, is precisely God in action (2 Cor 5:19). Hence the assertion of Jesus: “My Father is working still, and I am working” (Jn 5:17, <span>rsv<\/span>). What the Christian will rest from is the struggle against the forces of evil and the afflictions by which this present life is marred. The rest into which the Christian will enter will not be a state of uneventful boredom. God himself is dynamic, not static, and so also is his rest.<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, all that a Christian rests from simply sets him free to be active ceaselessly and joyfully in the service of God, the Creator and Redeemer. In perfect harmony with all God’s works, and in complete fulfillment, Christians exultantly praise and serve the triune God. Joy will be full, without possibility of improvement or deficiency (cf. Rv 4:8-11; 5:8-14; 7:9-12). Such will be the rest without end of that eternal Sabbath that has a morning but no evening: “Let us therefore strive to enter that rest” (Heb 4:11, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Heaven; Lord’s Day, The; Sabbath.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>REST<\/h3>\n<p>Freedom from work or activity. The source of the Christian doctrine of rest is the rest of God himself, who, after completing the work of Creation in six days, “rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done” (Gn 2:2). This provides the basis for the Hebrew Sabbath as the weekly seventh day of rest (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sabbath<\/span> is the Hebrew term for rest), which is presented as an ordinance of Creation. The fourth commandment demands the consecration of the Sabbath day to God and the limitation of labor to six days precisely because God made all things in six days and rested the seventh day (Ex 20:8-11).<\/p>\n<p>The biblical concept of rest, however, is not just past (Creation) and present (weekly) but also future. This future aspect received symbolic expression in the Israelites’ pilgrimage under the leadership of Moses through the wilderness from the bondage of Egypt to the “rest” of the Promised Land. That rest was attained under Joshua, who led them into the land and settled them there (see Jos 23–24).<\/p>\n<p>The 40 years of restless wandering in the wilderness meant that the whole adult generation that set out with Moses perished without entering the Promised Land. This was a judgment they brought upon themselves by their ingratitude and rebelliousness (Nm 14:26-35). Centuries later God warned their descendants against the danger of following this example of hard-heartedness and reaping a similar consequence of not entering his rest: “Today, when you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts” (Ps 95:7-11). The author of Hebrews cites this passage (Heb 3:7-8; 4:7) as evidence that God’s rest is not a matter of past history but that “the promise of entering his rest remains.” The word “today” indicates that the day of grace is not closed: “For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not speak later of another day. So then, there remains a sabbath rest for the people of God” (4:8-9, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>It is <em>God’s<\/em> rest into which all persons are encouraged to enter. The weekly day of rest is a reminder and a reflection of that rest. The rest of the Israelites in the Promised Land after their wilderness wanderings is a symbol of God’s eternal rest that his people will share. The rest that Christ gives to those who come to him (Mt 11:28) is a foretaste and a guarantee of the divine rest that awaits them. The rest after death of believers who have fallen asleep in Christ is a blissful intensification of the reality of this experience: “Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord. . . . They may rest from their labors” (Rv 14:13, <span>rsv<\/span>). But the completion of this rest in its inexpressible fullness will take place at the return of Christ, when at last all who are his will be fully conformed to his likeness (1 Jn 3:2). Salvation will be consummated as they are clothed with imperishable, glorified bodies (2 Cor 5), and the renewed order of creation in which righteousness dwells will be established (2 Pt 3:13).<\/p>\n<p>This will be the climactic point of all history and the moment of the entry of God’s people into the full and unending enjoyment of his rest. The completion of the redemption purchased by Christ at the cross will mean rest and freedom from all sin, and this in turn will mean rest and freedom from all sorrow, pain, suffering, persecution, frustration, injustice, and death (Rv 7:9-17; 21:1-7). The rest of mankind, moreover, will involve the rest of God’s whole creation as it is brought to the perfection of that glorious destiny for which it was intended from the very beginning (cf. Rom 8:19-25).<\/p>\n<p>Rest is not synonymous with inactivity. What God rested from was the work of Creation. He continues constantly to be active, however, in providentially sustaining all that he has created and in the work both of righteous judgment and gracious salvation. Jesus Christ, indeed, in his incarnation, life, death, rising, and glorification, is precisely God in action (2 Cor 5:19). Hence the assertion of Jesus: “My Father is working still, and I am working” (Jn 5:17, <span>rsv<\/span>). What the Christian will rest from is the struggle against the forces of evil and the afflictions by which this present life is marred. The rest into which the Christian will enter will not be a state of uneventful boredom. God himself is dynamic, not static, and so also is his rest.<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, all that a Christian rests from simply sets him free to be active ceaselessly and joyfully in the service of God, the Creator and Redeemer. In perfect harmony with all God’s works, and in complete fulfillment, Christians exultantly praise and serve the triune God. Joy will be full, without possibility of improvement or deficiency (cf. Rv 4:8-11; 5:8-14; 7:9-12). Such will be the rest without end of that eternal Sabbath that has a morning but no evening: “Let us therefore strive to enter that rest” (Heb 4:11, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Heaven; Lord’s Day, The; Sabbath.<\/p>","summary_ro":"REST Freedom from work or activity. The source of the Christian doctrine of rest is the rest of God himself, who, after completing the work of Creation in six days, “rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done” (Gn 2:2). This provides the basis for the Hebrew Sabbath as the weekly seventh day of rest (sabbath is the Hebrew term for rest), which is presented as an ordinance of Creation. The fourth commandment demands the consecration of the Sabbath day to God and the limitati...","summary_en":"REST Freedom from work or activity. The source of the Christian doctrine of rest is the rest of God himself, who, after completing the work of Creation in six days, “rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done” (Gn 2:2). This provides the basis for the Hebrew Sabbath as the weekly seventh day of rest (sabbath is the Hebrew term for rest), which is presented as an ordinance of Creation. The fourth commandment demands the consecration of the Sabbath day to God and the limitati...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54709,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:28","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:28<\/strong> The <em>heavy burdens<\/em> were likely caused by the legal requirements of the teachers of religious law and Pharisees (see 23:4). • <em>rest:<\/em> Spiritual refreshment in either a present or a future sense (cp. 1:21; Heb 4:8-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:28<\/strong> The <em>heavy burdens<\/em> were likely caused by the legal requirements of the teachers of religious law and Pharisees (see 23:4). • <em>rest:<\/em> Spiritual refreshment in either a present or a future sense (cp. 1:21; Heb 4:8-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:28 The heavy burdens were likely caused by the legal requirements of the teachers of religious law and Pharisees (see 23:4). • rest: Spiritual refreshment in either a present or a future sense (cp. 1:21; Heb 4:8-11).","summary_en":"11:28 The heavy burdens were likely caused by the legal requirements of the teachers of religious law and Pharisees (see 23:4). • rest: Spiritual refreshment in either a present or a future sense (cp. 1:21; Heb 4:8-11).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82335,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:28","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:28<\/strong> The <em>heavy burdens<\/em> were likely caused by the legal requirements of the teachers of religious law and Pharisees (see 23:4). • <em>rest:<\/em> Spiritual refreshment in either a present or a future sense (cp. 1:21; Heb 4:8-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:28<\/strong> The <em>heavy burdens<\/em> were likely caused by the legal requirements of the teachers of religious law and Pharisees (see 23:4). • <em>rest:<\/em> Spiritual refreshment in either a present or a future sense (cp. 1:21; Heb 4:8-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:28 The heavy burdens were likely caused by the legal requirements of the teachers of religious law and Pharisees (see 23:4). • rest: Spiritual refreshment in either a present or a future sense (cp. 1:21; Heb 4:8-11).","summary_en":"11:28 The heavy burdens were likely caused by the legal requirements of the teachers of religious law and Pharisees (see 23:4). • rest: Spiritual refreshment in either a present or a future sense (cp. 1:21; Heb 4:8-11).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":109961,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:28","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:28<\/strong> The <em>heavy burdens<\/em> were likely caused by the legal requirements of the teachers of religious law and Pharisees (see 23:4). • <em>rest:<\/em> Spiritual refreshment in either a present or a future sense (cp. 1:21; Heb 4:8-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:28<\/strong> The <em>heavy burdens<\/em> were likely caused by the legal requirements of the teachers of religious law and Pharisees (see 23:4). • <em>rest:<\/em> Spiritual refreshment in either a present or a future sense (cp. 1:21; Heb 4:8-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:28 The heavy burdens were likely caused by the legal requirements of the teachers of religious law and Pharisees (see 23:4). • rest: Spiritual refreshment in either a present or a future sense (cp. 1:21; Heb 4:8-11).","summary_en":"11:28 The heavy burdens were likely caused by the legal requirements of the teachers of religious law and Pharisees (see 23:4). • rest: Spiritual refreshment in either a present or a future sense (cp. 1:21; Heb 4:8-11).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137587,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:28","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:28<\/strong> The <em>heavy burdens<\/em> were likely caused by the legal requirements of the teachers of religious law and Pharisees (see 23:4). • <em>rest:<\/em> Spiritual refreshment in either a present or a future sense (cp. 1:21; Heb 4:8-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:28<\/strong> The <em>heavy burdens<\/em> were likely caused by the legal requirements of the teachers of religious law and Pharisees (see 23:4). • <em>rest:<\/em> Spiritual refreshment in either a present or a future sense (cp. 1:21; Heb 4:8-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:28 The heavy burdens were likely caused by the legal requirements of the teachers of religious law and Pharisees (see 23:4). • rest: Spiritual refreshment in either a present or a future sense (cp. 1:21; Heb 4:8-11).","summary_en":"11:28 The heavy burdens were likely caused by the legal requirements of the teachers of religious law and Pharisees (see 23:4). • rest: Spiritual refreshment in either a present or a future sense (cp. 1:21; Heb 4:8-11).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60359,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Identity","title_en":"Community Identity","content_ro":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","summary_en":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67638,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Sabbath Rest","title_en":"God’s Sabbath Rest","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Sabbath Rest<\/h3>\n<p>The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>But what is this “rest” they failed to enter, which still remains for the people of God (Heb 4:1-3)? The author of Hebrews clearly had more in mind than the physical land of Canaan as the place of “special rest” (4:8-9). Genesis 2:2 speaks of God’s rest as something that he prepared from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3-4). God’s rest relates to ceasing from one’s own work as God did from his (4:10). This rest can be entered by those who “hear his voice,” don’t harden their hearts, and believe the Good News (4:1-3, 7).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the Day of Atonement is called a “Sabbath day of complete rest” (Lev 16:29-31). On that day, people ceased completely from their own work. In the new covenant, Jesus as our Great High Priest has offered a once-for-all sacrifice that decisively dealt with sin (9:7-28). He has provided the ultimate atoning sacrifice, and he thus offers people a spiritual rest, which they enter by believing this Good News.<\/p>\n<p>God’s rest that is available through Jesus has two aspects. First, those who believe in him have ceased from their own works—that is, they no longer work for God’s acceptance, but they trust in Christ’s finished work (Eph 2:8-9) and enjoy the blessings of peace with God (John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19-21). Second, they look forward to an eternal life of rest and enjoyment in God’s presence (Isa 26:19; Rev 14:13). Jesus Christ gives complete and perfect rest (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:1-3; Exod 16:21-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16; Lev 16:29-31; Isa 52:7; 54:13-14; 56:2, 4; 57:2, 21; 58:13; Ezek 20:20; Matt 11:28-30; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 8:48; John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:19-21; Eph 2:17; Col 1:20; 2:16; 3:15; Heb 4:1-11; 2 Pet 1:2<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Sabbath Rest<\/h3>\n<p>The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>But what is this “rest” they failed to enter, which still remains for the people of God (Heb 4:1-3)? The author of Hebrews clearly had more in mind than the physical land of Canaan as the place of “special rest” (4:8-9). Genesis 2:2 speaks of God’s rest as something that he prepared from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3-4). God’s rest relates to ceasing from one’s own work as God did from his (4:10). This rest can be entered by those who “hear his voice,” don’t harden their hearts, and believe the Good News (4:1-3, 7).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the Day of Atonement is called a “Sabbath day of complete rest” (Lev 16:29-31). On that day, people ceased completely from their own work. In the new covenant, Jesus as our Great High Priest has offered a once-for-all sacrifice that decisively dealt with sin (9:7-28). He has provided the ultimate atoning sacrifice, and he thus offers people a spiritual rest, which they enter by believing this Good News.<\/p>\n<p>God’s rest that is available through Jesus has two aspects. First, those who believe in him have ceased from their own works—that is, they no longer work for God’s acceptance, but they trust in Christ’s finished work (Eph 2:8-9) and enjoy the blessings of peace with God (John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19-21). Second, they look forward to an eternal life of rest and enjoyment in God’s presence (Isa 26:19; Rev 14:13). Jesus Christ gives complete and perfect rest (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:1-3; Exod 16:21-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16; Lev 16:29-31; Isa 52:7; 54:13-14; 56:2, 4; 57:2, 21; 58:13; Ezek 20:20; Matt 11:28-30; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 8:48; John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:19-21; Eph 2:17; Col 1:20; 2:16; 3:15; Heb 4:1-11; 2 Pet 1:2<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Sabbath Rest The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience. But wha...","summary_en":"God’s Sabbath Rest The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience. But wha...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87985,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Identity","title_en":"Community Identity","content_ro":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","summary_en":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95264,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Sabbath Rest","title_en":"God’s Sabbath Rest","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Sabbath Rest<\/h3>\n<p>The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>But what is this “rest” they failed to enter, which still remains for the people of God (Heb 4:1-3)? The author of Hebrews clearly had more in mind than the physical land of Canaan as the place of “special rest” (4:8-9). Genesis 2:2 speaks of God’s rest as something that he prepared from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3-4). God’s rest relates to ceasing from one’s own work as God did from his (4:10). This rest can be entered by those who “hear his voice,” don’t harden their hearts, and believe the Good News (4:1-3, 7).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the Day of Atonement is called a “Sabbath day of complete rest” (Lev 16:29-31). On that day, people ceased completely from their own work. In the new covenant, Jesus as our Great High Priest has offered a once-for-all sacrifice that decisively dealt with sin (9:7-28). He has provided the ultimate atoning sacrifice, and he thus offers people a spiritual rest, which they enter by believing this Good News.<\/p>\n<p>God’s rest that is available through Jesus has two aspects. First, those who believe in him have ceased from their own works—that is, they no longer work for God’s acceptance, but they trust in Christ’s finished work (Eph 2:8-9) and enjoy the blessings of peace with God (John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19-21). Second, they look forward to an eternal life of rest and enjoyment in God’s presence (Isa 26:19; Rev 14:13). Jesus Christ gives complete and perfect rest (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:1-3; Exod 16:21-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16; Lev 16:29-31; Isa 52:7; 54:13-14; 56:2, 4; 57:2, 21; 58:13; Ezek 20:20; Matt 11:28-30; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 8:48; John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:19-21; Eph 2:17; Col 1:20; 2:16; 3:15; Heb 4:1-11; 2 Pet 1:2<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Sabbath Rest<\/h3>\n<p>The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>But what is this “rest” they failed to enter, which still remains for the people of God (Heb 4:1-3)? The author of Hebrews clearly had more in mind than the physical land of Canaan as the place of “special rest” (4:8-9). Genesis 2:2 speaks of God’s rest as something that he prepared from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3-4). God’s rest relates to ceasing from one’s own work as God did from his (4:10). This rest can be entered by those who “hear his voice,” don’t harden their hearts, and believe the Good News (4:1-3, 7).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the Day of Atonement is called a “Sabbath day of complete rest” (Lev 16:29-31). On that day, people ceased completely from their own work. In the new covenant, Jesus as our Great High Priest has offered a once-for-all sacrifice that decisively dealt with sin (9:7-28). He has provided the ultimate atoning sacrifice, and he thus offers people a spiritual rest, which they enter by believing this Good News.<\/p>\n<p>God’s rest that is available through Jesus has two aspects. First, those who believe in him have ceased from their own works—that is, they no longer work for God’s acceptance, but they trust in Christ’s finished work (Eph 2:8-9) and enjoy the blessings of peace with God (John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19-21). Second, they look forward to an eternal life of rest and enjoyment in God’s presence (Isa 26:19; Rev 14:13). Jesus Christ gives complete and perfect rest (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:1-3; Exod 16:21-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16; Lev 16:29-31; Isa 52:7; 54:13-14; 56:2, 4; 57:2, 21; 58:13; Ezek 20:20; Matt 11:28-30; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 8:48; John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:19-21; Eph 2:17; Col 1:20; 2:16; 3:15; Heb 4:1-11; 2 Pet 1:2<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Sabbath Rest The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience. But wha...","summary_en":"God’s Sabbath Rest The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience. But wha...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115611,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Identity","title_en":"Community Identity","content_ro":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","summary_en":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122890,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Sabbath Rest","title_en":"God’s Sabbath Rest","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Sabbath Rest<\/h3>\n<p>The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>But what is this “rest” they failed to enter, which still remains for the people of God (Heb 4:1-3)? The author of Hebrews clearly had more in mind than the physical land of Canaan as the place of “special rest” (4:8-9). Genesis 2:2 speaks of God’s rest as something that he prepared from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3-4). God’s rest relates to ceasing from one’s own work as God did from his (4:10). This rest can be entered by those who “hear his voice,” don’t harden their hearts, and believe the Good News (4:1-3, 7).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the Day of Atonement is called a “Sabbath day of complete rest” (Lev 16:29-31). On that day, people ceased completely from their own work. In the new covenant, Jesus as our Great High Priest has offered a once-for-all sacrifice that decisively dealt with sin (9:7-28). He has provided the ultimate atoning sacrifice, and he thus offers people a spiritual rest, which they enter by believing this Good News.<\/p>\n<p>God’s rest that is available through Jesus has two aspects. First, those who believe in him have ceased from their own works—that is, they no longer work for God’s acceptance, but they trust in Christ’s finished work (Eph 2:8-9) and enjoy the blessings of peace with God (John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19-21). Second, they look forward to an eternal life of rest and enjoyment in God’s presence (Isa 26:19; Rev 14:13). Jesus Christ gives complete and perfect rest (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:1-3; Exod 16:21-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16; Lev 16:29-31; Isa 52:7; 54:13-14; 56:2, 4; 57:2, 21; 58:13; Ezek 20:20; Matt 11:28-30; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 8:48; John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:19-21; Eph 2:17; Col 1:20; 2:16; 3:15; Heb 4:1-11; 2 Pet 1:2<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Sabbath Rest<\/h3>\n<p>The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>But what is this “rest” they failed to enter, which still remains for the people of God (Heb 4:1-3)? The author of Hebrews clearly had more in mind than the physical land of Canaan as the place of “special rest” (4:8-9). Genesis 2:2 speaks of God’s rest as something that he prepared from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3-4). God’s rest relates to ceasing from one’s own work as God did from his (4:10). This rest can be entered by those who “hear his voice,” don’t harden their hearts, and believe the Good News (4:1-3, 7).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the Day of Atonement is called a “Sabbath day of complete rest” (Lev 16:29-31). On that day, people ceased completely from their own work. In the new covenant, Jesus as our Great High Priest has offered a once-for-all sacrifice that decisively dealt with sin (9:7-28). He has provided the ultimate atoning sacrifice, and he thus offers people a spiritual rest, which they enter by believing this Good News.<\/p>\n<p>God’s rest that is available through Jesus has two aspects. First, those who believe in him have ceased from their own works—that is, they no longer work for God’s acceptance, but they trust in Christ’s finished work (Eph 2:8-9) and enjoy the blessings of peace with God (John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19-21). Second, they look forward to an eternal life of rest and enjoyment in God’s presence (Isa 26:19; Rev 14:13). Jesus Christ gives complete and perfect rest (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:1-3; Exod 16:21-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16; Lev 16:29-31; Isa 52:7; 54:13-14; 56:2, 4; 57:2, 21; 58:13; Ezek 20:20; Matt 11:28-30; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 8:48; John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:19-21; Eph 2:17; Col 1:20; 2:16; 3:15; Heb 4:1-11; 2 Pet 1:2<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Sabbath Rest The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience. But wha...","summary_en":"God’s Sabbath Rest The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience. But wha...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143237,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Community Identity","title_en":"Community Identity","content_ro":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Community Identity<\/h3>\n<p>In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole.<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing their oneness. The Decalogue (Exod 20:2-17) and the blessing of Aaron (Num 6:24-26), for example, are given in the singular. The individual could often represent the group, and the group could be referred to as an individual. Nehemiah, for example, asks forgiveness for the sins that caused the exile to Babylon as though he had been one of those transgressors (“we have sinned,” Neh 1:6-7). Nehemiah was governor of Judea from 445 to 433 <span>BC<\/span>, about 140 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (586 <span>BC<\/span>), so he did not participate in the sins leading to the Exile. Yet in his prayer, he identifies with his people in their sinfulness. In this same way, the high priest could represent the entire people on the Day of Atonement (see Lev 16). Because the individual Israelite was so strongly identified with the community, the sin of the individual would become the sin of the community if not addressed (see Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>In like manner, the Christian community is described as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor 12:27; Eph 4:12). The members partake of Christ’s identity through the Holy Spirit. That is, as the body of Christ they manifest Christ’s life in their lives, and as a unified whole they reveal him to the world. Paul exhorts the Galatians to share the burdens of others (Gal 6:2) and so to model Christ’s example (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 20:5-6, 8-10; Lev 4:3-21; 20:1-5; Josh 7:1-26; Neh 1:6-7; 1 Cor 12:12-27; Gal 6:2; Eph 4:11-13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","summary_en":"Community Identity In modern Western society, the individual is considered to be the primary social entity. In Israel, by contrast, an individual’s identity and significance were determined by his or her membership in the community. All Israelites were expected to partake of the common identity of the community as the “children of Israel” and to embody the characteristics that marked the whole. In the Old Testament, the people are often referred to or addressed in the singular, emphasizing th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150516,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Sabbath Rest","title_en":"God’s Sabbath Rest","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Sabbath Rest<\/h3>\n<p>The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>But what is this “rest” they failed to enter, which still remains for the people of God (Heb 4:1-3)? The author of Hebrews clearly had more in mind than the physical land of Canaan as the place of “special rest” (4:8-9). Genesis 2:2 speaks of God’s rest as something that he prepared from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3-4). God’s rest relates to ceasing from one’s own work as God did from his (4:10). This rest can be entered by those who “hear his voice,” don’t harden their hearts, and believe the Good News (4:1-3, 7).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the Day of Atonement is called a “Sabbath day of complete rest” (Lev 16:29-31). On that day, people ceased completely from their own work. In the new covenant, Jesus as our Great High Priest has offered a once-for-all sacrifice that decisively dealt with sin (9:7-28). He has provided the ultimate atoning sacrifice, and he thus offers people a spiritual rest, which they enter by believing this Good News.<\/p>\n<p>God’s rest that is available through Jesus has two aspects. First, those who believe in him have ceased from their own works—that is, they no longer work for God’s acceptance, but they trust in Christ’s finished work (Eph 2:8-9) and enjoy the blessings of peace with God (John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19-21). Second, they look forward to an eternal life of rest and enjoyment in God’s presence (Isa 26:19; Rev 14:13). Jesus Christ gives complete and perfect rest (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:1-3; Exod 16:21-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16; Lev 16:29-31; Isa 52:7; 54:13-14; 56:2, 4; 57:2, 21; 58:13; Ezek 20:20; Matt 11:28-30; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 8:48; John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:19-21; Eph 2:17; Col 1:20; 2:16; 3:15; Heb 4:1-11; 2 Pet 1:2<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Sabbath Rest<\/h3>\n<p>The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>But what is this “rest” they failed to enter, which still remains for the people of God (Heb 4:1-3)? The author of Hebrews clearly had more in mind than the physical land of Canaan as the place of “special rest” (4:8-9). Genesis 2:2 speaks of God’s rest as something that he prepared from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3-4). God’s rest relates to ceasing from one’s own work as God did from his (4:10). This rest can be entered by those who “hear his voice,” don’t harden their hearts, and believe the Good News (4:1-3, 7).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the Day of Atonement is called a “Sabbath day of complete rest” (Lev 16:29-31). On that day, people ceased completely from their own work. In the new covenant, Jesus as our Great High Priest has offered a once-for-all sacrifice that decisively dealt with sin (9:7-28). He has provided the ultimate atoning sacrifice, and he thus offers people a spiritual rest, which they enter by believing this Good News.<\/p>\n<p>God’s rest that is available through Jesus has two aspects. First, those who believe in him have ceased from their own works—that is, they no longer work for God’s acceptance, but they trust in Christ’s finished work (Eph 2:8-9) and enjoy the blessings of peace with God (John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19-21). Second, they look forward to an eternal life of rest and enjoyment in God’s presence (Isa 26:19; Rev 14:13). Jesus Christ gives complete and perfect rest (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:1-3; Exod 16:21-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16; Lev 16:29-31; Isa 52:7; 54:13-14; 56:2, 4; 57:2, 21; 58:13; Ezek 20:20; Matt 11:28-30; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 8:48; John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:19-21; Eph 2:17; Col 1:20; 2:16; 3:15; Heb 4:1-11; 2 Pet 1:2<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Sabbath Rest The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience. But wha...","summary_en":"God’s Sabbath Rest The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience. But wha...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"29":[{"id":13624,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gentleness","title_en":"Gentleness","content_ro":"<h3>GENTLENESS<\/h3>\n<p>In the OT an attitude of humility or bending low (2 Sm 22:36, <span>kjv<\/span>; cf. Ps 18:35, <span>kjv<\/span>). Its adjectival and adverbial forms (“gentle,” “gently”) can mean courteous and unpretentious (Prv 15:4), quiet and tender (Dt 32:2; Is 8:6), or unharsh (2 Sm 18:5; Jb 15:11).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT several words are translated “gentleness,” “gentle,” or “gently.” Shades of meaning include (1) mildness, meekness, forbearance (Mt 11:29; 1 Cor 4:21; 2 Cor 10:1; Gal 5:23; 1 Tm 6:11; 1 Pt 3:4, 15), or a courteous and unassuming attitude (2 Tm 2:25); (2) kindness expressed toward others (1 Thes 2:7; 2 Tm 2:24, <span>kjv<\/span>); and (3) fitting, fair, or seemly (1 Tm 3:3; Ti 3:2; 1 Pt 2:18). Church leaders and other believers are instructed to deal gently with those who stumble (Gal 6:1), oppose the faith (2 Tm 2:25), or are ignorant and wayward (Heb 5:2).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GENTLENESS<\/h3>\n<p>In the OT an attitude of humility or bending low (2 Sm 22:36, <span>kjv<\/span>; cf. Ps 18:35, <span>kjv<\/span>). Its adjectival and adverbial forms (“gentle,” “gently”) can mean courteous and unpretentious (Prv 15:4), quiet and tender (Dt 32:2; Is 8:6), or unharsh (2 Sm 18:5; Jb 15:11).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT several words are translated “gentleness,” “gentle,” or “gently.” Shades of meaning include (1) mildness, meekness, forbearance (Mt 11:29; 1 Cor 4:21; 2 Cor 10:1; Gal 5:23; 1 Tm 6:11; 1 Pt 3:4, 15), or a courteous and unassuming attitude (2 Tm 2:25); (2) kindness expressed toward others (1 Thes 2:7; 2 Tm 2:24, <span>kjv<\/span>); and (3) fitting, fair, or seemly (1 Tm 3:3; Ti 3:2; 1 Pt 2:18). Church leaders and other believers are instructed to deal gently with those who stumble (Gal 6:1), oppose the faith (2 Tm 2:25), or are ignorant and wayward (Heb 5:2).<\/p>","summary_ro":"GENTLENESS In the OT an attitude of humility or bending low (2 Sm 22:36, kjv; cf. Ps 18:35, kjv). Its adjectival and adverbial forms (“gentle,” “gently”) can mean courteous and unpretentious (Prv 15:4), quiet and tender (Dt 32:2; Is 8:6), or unharsh (2 Sm 18:5; Jb 15:11). In the NT several words are translated “gentleness,” “gentle,” or “gently.” Shades of meaning include (1) mildness, meekness, forbearance (Mt 11:29; 1 Cor 4:21; 2 Cor 10:1; Gal 5:23; 1 Tm 6:11; 1 Pt 3:4, 15), or a courteous ...","summary_en":"GENTLENESS In the OT an attitude of humility or bending low (2 Sm 22:36, kjv; cf. Ps 18:35, kjv). Its adjectival and adverbial forms (“gentle,” “gently”) can mean courteous and unpretentious (Prv 15:4), quiet and tender (Dt 32:2; Is 8:6), or unharsh (2 Sm 18:5; Jb 15:11). In the NT several words are translated “gentleness,” “gentle,” or “gently.” Shades of meaning include (1) mildness, meekness, forbearance (Mt 11:29; 1 Cor 4:21; 2 Cor 10:1; Gal 5:23; 1 Tm 6:11; 1 Pt 3:4, 15), or a courteous ...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":15710,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Heart","title_en":"Heart","content_ro":"<h3>HEART<\/h3>\n<p>Vital bodily organ; emotional center of one’s being.<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew and Greek, as in modern English, “heart” is used to designate a physical organ as well as the emotional center of one’s being. “Heart” (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">leb<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kardia<\/span>) occurs approximately 1,000 times in the Bible, though it is often disguised in translation. The range of meaning is great.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PhysicalHeart\">Physical Heart<\/p>\n<p>That the beating heart indicates life seems implied in 1 Samuel 25:37-39 (see <span>nlt<\/span> mg), despite the delay in Nabal’s death. Physical food and wine affect the heart (Jgs 19:5; Ps 104:15; Acts 14:17), and the heart can “faint” and “tremble.” The heart’s position in the body yields an obvious metaphor for “the center” (Mt 12:40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PyschologicalHeart\">Pyschological Heart<\/p>\n<p>The heart attends intellectually (e.g., Jer 12:11); it also perceives (Jn 12:40), understands (1 Kgs 3:9), debates (Mk 2:6), reflects (Lk 2:19), remembers (Lk 2:51), thinks (Dt 8:17), imagines (Lk 1:51), is wise (Eccl 1:17, <span>kjv<\/span>), has technical skill (Ex 28:3, <span>kjv<\/span>), and much more.<\/p>\n<p>Emotionally, the heart experiences intoxicated merriment (1 Sm 25:36), gladness (Is 30:29), joy (Jn 16:22), sorrow (Neh 2:2), anguish (Rom 9:2), bitterness (Prv 14:10), anxiety (1 Sm 4:13), despair (Eccl 2:20), love (2 Sm 14:1), trust (Ps 112:7), affection (2 Cor 7:3), lust (Mt 5:28), callousness (Mk 3:5), hatred (Lv 19:17), fear (Gn 42:28), jealousy (Jas 3:14), desire (Rom 10:1), discouragement (Nm 32:9), sympathy (Ex 23:9), anger (Dt 19:6, <span>kjv<\/span>), irresolution (2 Chr 13:7, <span>kjv<\/span>), and much more.<\/p>\n<p>Volitionally, the heart can purpose (1 Cor 4:5), incline to (1 Sm 14:7), prompt (2 Kgs 12:4; cf. Prv 4:23), be steadfast (Acts 11:23), be willing (Ex 35:22), contrive evil (Acts 5:4), or follow its “treasure” (Mt 6:21).<\/p>\n<p>Morally, the heart can be gentle, lowly (Mt 11:29), holy (1 Thes 3:13), faithful (Neh 9:8), upright (Ps 97:11), pure, single-minded (Jas 4:8), clean (Acts 15:8), loving toward God (Mk 12:30) and others (1 Pt 1:22), hardened, or sensitive (Ez 11:19). Scripture’s emphasis falls upon the heart’s evil (Gn 6:5 and throughout), as self-deceiving (Jas 1:26), deceitful (Jer 17:9), avaricious (Mt 6:19-21), lustful (Mt 5:28), arrogant (Is 9:9), impious (Acts 7:51), perverse (Ps 101:4), and impenitent (Rom 2:5). Nothing defiles a man worse than his own heart (Mk 7:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Yet out of the heart can come good (Lk 6:45; 8:15). Even when frustrated by circumstances or by fear, the heart’s good intention remains good; its evil intent, bad (1 Kgs 8:18; Mt 5:28).<\/p>\n<p>Being so complex, a person’s heart is sadly divided, and Scripture often extols a perfect, whole, true (i.e., united) heart (Gn 20:5; Ps 86:11; Acts 8:37). The “heart” signifies the total inner self, a person’s hidden core of being (1 Pt 3:4), with which one communes, which one “pours out” in prayer, words, and deeds (Ps 62:8; Mt 15:18-19). It is the genuine self, distinguished from appearance, public position, and physical presence (1 Sm 16:7; 2 Cor 5:12; 1 Thes 2:17). And this “heart-self” has its own nature, character, and disposition (Dn 4:16; 7:4, <span>kjv<\/span>; cf. Mt 12:33-37).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSpiritualHeart\">The Spiritual Heart<\/p>\n<p>The heart is especially important in biblical religion. The mystery of the hidden self is fully known to God and to Christ (Jer 17:10; Lk 9:47; Rom 8:27), and the heart is the seat of our knowledge of God (2 Cor 4:6). The state of heart governs the vision of God (Mt 5:8); from the heart one speaks to God (Ps 27:8); the heart is the locus of divine indwelling (2 Cor 1:22; Gal 4:6; Eph 3:17).<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, moral evil in the heart is seen in biblical perspective as sin against God. Senseless hearts are darkened, often secretly idolatrous, far from God, “not right” before God (Dt 29:18-19; Mt 15:8; Acts 8:21; Rom 1:21). Yet the Lord will not despise a broken, contrite heart (Ps 51:17). When one’s heart is turned toward God, he promises to make it sensitive to divine things, renewed and purified (Dt 4:29; 2 Kgs 23:25; Ps 51:10; Jl 2:13; Ez 36:25-27). God’s law shall then be written on the heart as the inward guide and incentive (Jer 31:33; Heb 8:10; cf. 2 Cor 3:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>In Christian terms, such transformation involves believing the gospel from the “honest and good heart” that provides fruitful soil for the Word of God (Lk 8:15; Rom 10:9). The true heart draws near to God, loves him with all its intellect, feeling, and will (Lk 10:27; Heb 10:22). Then God gives strength, reward, renewal, grace, peace, and joy to the heart (Ps 73:26; Is 57:15; Acts 2:46; Phil 4:7; Heb 13:9). So the ancient ideal becomes possible again, that of being “a man after God’s own heart” (1 Sm 13:14; Acts 13:22).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HEART<\/h3>\n<p>Vital bodily organ; emotional center of one’s being.<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew and Greek, as in modern English, “heart” is used to designate a physical organ as well as the emotional center of one’s being. “Heart” (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">leb<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kardia<\/span>) occurs approximately 1,000 times in the Bible, though it is often disguised in translation. The range of meaning is great.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PhysicalHeart\">Physical Heart<\/p>\n<p>That the beating heart indicates life seems implied in 1 Samuel 25:37-39 (see <span>nlt<\/span> mg), despite the delay in Nabal’s death. Physical food and wine affect the heart (Jgs 19:5; Ps 104:15; Acts 14:17), and the heart can “faint” and “tremble.” The heart’s position in the body yields an obvious metaphor for “the center” (Mt 12:40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PyschologicalHeart\">Pyschological Heart<\/p>\n<p>The heart attends intellectually (e.g., Jer 12:11); it also perceives (Jn 12:40), understands (1 Kgs 3:9), debates (Mk 2:6), reflects (Lk 2:19), remembers (Lk 2:51), thinks (Dt 8:17), imagines (Lk 1:51), is wise (Eccl 1:17, <span>kjv<\/span>), has technical skill (Ex 28:3, <span>kjv<\/span>), and much more.<\/p>\n<p>Emotionally, the heart experiences intoxicated merriment (1 Sm 25:36), gladness (Is 30:29), joy (Jn 16:22), sorrow (Neh 2:2), anguish (Rom 9:2), bitterness (Prv 14:10), anxiety (1 Sm 4:13), despair (Eccl 2:20), love (2 Sm 14:1), trust (Ps 112:7), affection (2 Cor 7:3), lust (Mt 5:28), callousness (Mk 3:5), hatred (Lv 19:17), fear (Gn 42:28), jealousy (Jas 3:14), desire (Rom 10:1), discouragement (Nm 32:9), sympathy (Ex 23:9), anger (Dt 19:6, <span>kjv<\/span>), irresolution (2 Chr 13:7, <span>kjv<\/span>), and much more.<\/p>\n<p>Volitionally, the heart can purpose (1 Cor 4:5), incline to (1 Sm 14:7), prompt (2 Kgs 12:4; cf. Prv 4:23), be steadfast (Acts 11:23), be willing (Ex 35:22), contrive evil (Acts 5:4), or follow its “treasure” (Mt 6:21).<\/p>\n<p>Morally, the heart can be gentle, lowly (Mt 11:29), holy (1 Thes 3:13), faithful (Neh 9:8), upright (Ps 97:11), pure, single-minded (Jas 4:8), clean (Acts 15:8), loving toward God (Mk 12:30) and others (1 Pt 1:22), hardened, or sensitive (Ez 11:19). Scripture’s emphasis falls upon the heart’s evil (Gn 6:5 and throughout), as self-deceiving (Jas 1:26), deceitful (Jer 17:9), avaricious (Mt 6:19-21), lustful (Mt 5:28), arrogant (Is 9:9), impious (Acts 7:51), perverse (Ps 101:4), and impenitent (Rom 2:5). Nothing defiles a man worse than his own heart (Mk 7:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Yet out of the heart can come good (Lk 6:45; 8:15). Even when frustrated by circumstances or by fear, the heart’s good intention remains good; its evil intent, bad (1 Kgs 8:18; Mt 5:28).<\/p>\n<p>Being so complex, a person’s heart is sadly divided, and Scripture often extols a perfect, whole, true (i.e., united) heart (Gn 20:5; Ps 86:11; Acts 8:37). The “heart” signifies the total inner self, a person’s hidden core of being (1 Pt 3:4), with which one communes, which one “pours out” in prayer, words, and deeds (Ps 62:8; Mt 15:18-19). It is the genuine self, distinguished from appearance, public position, and physical presence (1 Sm 16:7; 2 Cor 5:12; 1 Thes 2:17). And this “heart-self” has its own nature, character, and disposition (Dn 4:16; 7:4, <span>kjv<\/span>; cf. Mt 12:33-37).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSpiritualHeart\">The Spiritual Heart<\/p>\n<p>The heart is especially important in biblical religion. The mystery of the hidden self is fully known to God and to Christ (Jer 17:10; Lk 9:47; Rom 8:27), and the heart is the seat of our knowledge of God (2 Cor 4:6). The state of heart governs the vision of God (Mt 5:8); from the heart one speaks to God (Ps 27:8); the heart is the locus of divine indwelling (2 Cor 1:22; Gal 4:6; Eph 3:17).<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, moral evil in the heart is seen in biblical perspective as sin against God. Senseless hearts are darkened, often secretly idolatrous, far from God, “not right” before God (Dt 29:18-19; Mt 15:8; Acts 8:21; Rom 1:21). Yet the Lord will not despise a broken, contrite heart (Ps 51:17). When one’s heart is turned toward God, he promises to make it sensitive to divine things, renewed and purified (Dt 4:29; 2 Kgs 23:25; Ps 51:10; Jl 2:13; Ez 36:25-27). God’s law shall then be written on the heart as the inward guide and incentive (Jer 31:33; Heb 8:10; cf. 2 Cor 3:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>In Christian terms, such transformation involves believing the gospel from the “honest and good heart” that provides fruitful soil for the Word of God (Lk 8:15; Rom 10:9). The true heart draws near to God, loves him with all its intellect, feeling, and will (Lk 10:27; Heb 10:22). Then God gives strength, reward, renewal, grace, peace, and joy to the heart (Ps 73:26; Is 57:15; Acts 2:46; Phil 4:7; Heb 13:9). So the ancient ideal becomes possible again, that of being “a man after God’s own heart” (1 Sm 13:14; Acts 13:22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"HEART Vital bodily organ; emotional center of one’s being. In Hebrew and Greek, as in modern English, “heart” is used to designate a physical organ as well as the emotional center of one’s being. “Heart” (Hebrew leb; Greek kardia) occurs approximately 1,000 times in the Bible, though it is often disguised in translation. The range of meaning is great. Physical Heart That the beating heart indicates life seems implied in 1 Samuel 25:37-39 (see nlt mg), despite the delay in Nabal’s death. Physi...","summary_en":"HEART Vital bodily organ; emotional center of one’s being. In Hebrew and Greek, as in modern English, “heart” is used to designate a physical organ as well as the emotional center of one’s being. “Heart” (Hebrew leb; Greek kardia) occurs approximately 1,000 times in the Bible, though it is often disguised in translation. The range of meaning is great. Physical Heart That the beating heart indicates life seems implied in 1 Samuel 25:37-39 (see nlt mg), despite the delay in Nabal’s death. Physi...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":16954,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Humility","title_en":"Humility","content_ro":"<h3>HUMILITY<\/h3>\n<p>A condition of lowliness or affliction in which one experiences a loss of power and prestige. Outside of biblical faith, humility in this sense would not usually be considered a virtue. Within the context of the Judeo-Christian tradition, however, humility is considered the proper attitude of human beings toward their Creator. Humility is a grateful and spontaneous awareness that life is a gift, and it is manifested as an ungrudging and unhypocritical acknowledgment of absolute dependence upon God.<\/p>\n<p>In biblical literature there is not a clear distinction between humility and meekness or patience. In early stages of Israel’s history, the humble were identified as the poor, the afflicted, and the powerless. The Lord delivers the humble but brings down the proud (1 Sm 2:7; 2 Sm 22:28). Before the power and glory of God, the patriarch Abraham confessed that he was but dust and ashes (Gn 18:27). Israel began as a nation subjected to slavery and knew themselves as a people chosen not because of numerical strength or material wealth but because of God’s love (Dt 7:7-8). By attributing the source of all wealth and power to the Lord, those two major sources of human pride and arrogance are brought under control (cf. Jer 9:23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The humble poor are the constant concern of the Lord (Ex 23:6, 11; Dt 15:4, 7). Consequently, the humility of the poor became the symbol of the righteous God-fearer (Nm 12:3). In the development of the concept of humility in the OT, humility is nearly equated with righteousness and is identified, along with justice and mercy, as the requirement of God (Mi 6:8). In the Psalms particularly, “the afflicted” is almost a technical term for the righteous (Pss 22:26; 25:9; 147:6).<\/p>\n<p>In addition, humility is the appropriate response of the sinner in the presence of the holiness of God. The prophet Isaiah, confronted by the glory of God in the temple, cried, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man” (Is 6:5). Thus humility became more of a character trait than a term that reflected a state of material poverty or affliction. It became a concept reflective of the essence of piety and godliness expected of all people who have God as their Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Only rarely in the NT does humility refer to an objective condition of poverty, affliction, or oppression.The humility motif is developed in connection with Jesus as Messiah. The religious ideal of humility that the OT attributed to the coming King certainly applied to Jesus (Zec 9:9; cf. Mt 21:4-5). As Son of God, Jesus took no thought for himself but lived a life of obedience and trust in God the Father. The apostle Paul attributed to the incarnate Son of God a self-emptying by which he “humbled himself” and took on the form of a servant (Phil 2:5-8). Jesus’ character exhibited no pride or arrogance.<\/p>\n<p>Though bold in the face of hypocrisy and unflinching in his repudiation of pretentious religion, Jesus was “gentle and humble in heart” (Mt 11:29). He could, therefore, issue a severe warning against desire for status and openly rebuke the Pharisees for their violence against the poor and oppressed (Lk 14:11; Mt 23:12). At the same time, he was humble before those whose servant and helper he had become (Lk 22:27; Mk 10:45; Mt 20:28). The highest dignity of Jesus and his willingness to accept the cross in submission to the Father’s will are one. So his teaching on poverty of spirit rang true as a testimony of his own life. He ascribed all glory to his Father and lived in total dependence upon him (Jn 5:19; 6:38; 7:15; 8:28, 50; 14:10, 24). By washing his disciples’ feet, he assumed the role of servant with no loss of dignity or self-worth. And he set forth such service as a model of a life that finds happiness in preferring others over one’s self (Jn 13:1-20; Phil 2:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, disciples of Jesus are also summoned to a life of humility. Turning their backs on status, security, and success, Christians seek an opportunity to gain themselves in serving others. Humility, thus, is the all-embracing life principle by which love seeks the good of others, and thus fulfills the law (cf. Rom 12:10; 13:8-10).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HUMILITY<\/h3>\n<p>A condition of lowliness or affliction in which one experiences a loss of power and prestige. Outside of biblical faith, humility in this sense would not usually be considered a virtue. Within the context of the Judeo-Christian tradition, however, humility is considered the proper attitude of human beings toward their Creator. Humility is a grateful and spontaneous awareness that life is a gift, and it is manifested as an ungrudging and unhypocritical acknowledgment of absolute dependence upon God.<\/p>\n<p>In biblical literature there is not a clear distinction between humility and meekness or patience. In early stages of Israel’s history, the humble were identified as the poor, the afflicted, and the powerless. The Lord delivers the humble but brings down the proud (1 Sm 2:7; 2 Sm 22:28). Before the power and glory of God, the patriarch Abraham confessed that he was but dust and ashes (Gn 18:27). Israel began as a nation subjected to slavery and knew themselves as a people chosen not because of numerical strength or material wealth but because of God’s love (Dt 7:7-8). By attributing the source of all wealth and power to the Lord, those two major sources of human pride and arrogance are brought under control (cf. Jer 9:23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The humble poor are the constant concern of the Lord (Ex 23:6, 11; Dt 15:4, 7). Consequently, the humility of the poor became the symbol of the righteous God-fearer (Nm 12:3). In the development of the concept of humility in the OT, humility is nearly equated with righteousness and is identified, along with justice and mercy, as the requirement of God (Mi 6:8). In the Psalms particularly, “the afflicted” is almost a technical term for the righteous (Pss 22:26; 25:9; 147:6).<\/p>\n<p>In addition, humility is the appropriate response of the sinner in the presence of the holiness of God. The prophet Isaiah, confronted by the glory of God in the temple, cried, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man” (Is 6:5). Thus humility became more of a character trait than a term that reflected a state of material poverty or affliction. It became a concept reflective of the essence of piety and godliness expected of all people who have God as their Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Only rarely in the NT does humility refer to an objective condition of poverty, affliction, or oppression.The humility motif is developed in connection with Jesus as Messiah. The religious ideal of humility that the OT attributed to the coming King certainly applied to Jesus (Zec 9:9; cf. Mt 21:4-5). As Son of God, Jesus took no thought for himself but lived a life of obedience and trust in God the Father. The apostle Paul attributed to the incarnate Son of God a self-emptying by which he “humbled himself” and took on the form of a servant (Phil 2:5-8). Jesus’ character exhibited no pride or arrogance.<\/p>\n<p>Though bold in the face of hypocrisy and unflinching in his repudiation of pretentious religion, Jesus was “gentle and humble in heart” (Mt 11:29). He could, therefore, issue a severe warning against desire for status and openly rebuke the Pharisees for their violence against the poor and oppressed (Lk 14:11; Mt 23:12). At the same time, he was humble before those whose servant and helper he had become (Lk 22:27; Mk 10:45; Mt 20:28). The highest dignity of Jesus and his willingness to accept the cross in submission to the Father’s will are one. So his teaching on poverty of spirit rang true as a testimony of his own life. He ascribed all glory to his Father and lived in total dependence upon him (Jn 5:19; 6:38; 7:15; 8:28, 50; 14:10, 24). By washing his disciples’ feet, he assumed the role of servant with no loss of dignity or self-worth. And he set forth such service as a model of a life that finds happiness in preferring others over one’s self (Jn 13:1-20; Phil 2:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, disciples of Jesus are also summoned to a life of humility. Turning their backs on status, security, and success, Christians seek an opportunity to gain themselves in serving others. Humility, thus, is the all-embracing life principle by which love seeks the good of others, and thus fulfills the law (cf. Rom 12:10; 13:8-10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"HUMILITY A condition of lowliness or affliction in which one experiences a loss of power and prestige. Outside of biblical faith, humility in this sense would not usually be considered a virtue. Within the context of the Judeo-Christian tradition, however, humility is considered the proper attitude of human beings toward their Creator. Humility is a grateful and spontaneous awareness that life is a gift, and it is manifested as an ungrudging and unhypocritical acknowledgment of absolute depen...","summary_en":"HUMILITY A condition of lowliness or affliction in which one experiences a loss of power and prestige. Outside of biblical faith, humility in this sense would not usually be considered a virtue. Within the context of the Judeo-Christian tradition, however, humility is considered the proper attitude of human beings toward their Creator. Humility is a grateful and spontaneous awareness that life is a gift, and it is manifested as an ungrudging and unhypocritical acknowledgment of absolute depen...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19717,"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":24761,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of Matthew","title_en":"Gospel of Matthew","content_ro":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","summary_en":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35995,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Soul","title_en":"Soul","content_ro":"<h3>SOUL<\/h3>\n<p>Term translating the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuche<\/span> and the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nephesh<\/span><em>.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The Greek philosopher Plato (fourth century <span>BC<\/span>) perceived the soul as the eternal element in humans; whereas the body perishes at death, the soul is indestructible. At death the soul enters another body; if it has been wicked in this life, it may be sent into an inferior human being or even an animal or bird. By means of transmigration from one body to another, the soul is eventually purged of evil. In the early centuries of the Christian era, Gnosticism also taught that the body was the prison house of the soul. Redemption comes to those initiated into the Gnostic secrets, leading to the release of the soul from the body.<\/p>\n<p>Biblical thought about the soul is different. In the OT the soul signifies that which is vital to humans in the broadest sense. The Hebrew and Greek words for soul often can be translated as “life”; occasionally, they can be used for the life of creatures (Gn 1:20; Lv 11:10). “Soul for soul” means “life for life” (Ex 21:23). In legal writings, a soul refers to a person in relation to a particular law (e.g., “If a soul shall sin . . . ,” Lv 4:2, <span>kjv<\/span>). When people were counted, they were counted as souls, that is, persons (Ex 1:5; Dt 10:22).<\/p>\n<p>In a narrower sense, the soul denotes human emotions and inner powers. People are called to love God with all their heart and soul (Dt 13:3). Knowledge and understanding (Ps 139:14), thought (1 Sm 20:3), love (1 Sm 18:1), and memory (Lam 3:20) all originate in the soul. Here the soul comes close to what today would be called the self, one’s person, personality, or ego.<\/p>\n<p>There is no suggestion in the OT of the transmigration of the soul as an immaterial, immortal entity. Man is a unity of body and soul—terms that describe not so much two separate entities in a person as much as one person from different standpoints. Hence, in the description of man’s creation in Genesis 2:7, the phrase “a living soul” (<span>kjv<\/span>) is better translated as “a living being.” The thought is not that men and women became <em>souls,<\/em> for clearly they had bodies. The use of the word in the original draws attention to the vital aspect of humans as “living beings.” The Hebrew view of the unity of the person may help to explain why people in the OT had only a shadowy view of life after death, for it would be difficult to conceive how people could exist without a body (Pss 16:10; 49:15; 88:3-12). Where hope of an afterlife exists, it is not because of the intrinsic character of the soul itself (as in Plato). It is grounded in confidence in the God who has power over death and the belief that communion with him cannot be broken even by death (Ex 3:6; 1 Sm 2:6; Jb 19:25-26; Pss 16:10-11; 73:24-25; Is 25:8; 26:19; Dn 12:2; Hos 6:1-3; 13:14).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the word for soul (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuche<\/span>) has a range of meanings similar to that in the OT. Often it is synonymous with life itself. Followers of Jesus are said to have risked their lives (souls) for his sake (Acts 15:26; cf. Jn 13:37; Rom 16:4; Phil 2:30). As the Son of Man, Jesus came not to be served but to serve and to give his life (soul) as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). As the Good Shepherd, he lays down his life (soul) for the sheep (Jn 10:14, 17-18). In Luke 14:26 the condition of discipleship is to hate one’s soul, that is, to be willing to deny oneself to the point of losing one’s life for Christ’s sake (cf. Lk 9:23; Rv 12:11).<\/p>\n<p>Frequently “soul” can mean “person” (Acts 2:43; 3:23; 7:14; Rom 2:9; 13:1; 1 Pt 3:20). The expression “every living soul” (Rv 16:3, <span>kjv<\/span>) reflects the vital aspect of living beings. As in the OT, the soul can denote not only the vital aspect of the person on the physical level, but it can also connote one’s emotional energies. It denotes the person himself, the seat of his or her emotions, one’s inmost being. For example, when Jesus was agonizing about his death, he spoke of his soul being crushed (Mt 26:38; Mk 14:34; cf. Ps 42:6). In an entirely different setting, Jesus promised rest to the souls of those who come to him (Mt 11:29). Here, as elsewhere, “soul” denotes the essential person (cf. Lk 2:35; 2 Cor 1:23; 2 Thes 2:8; 3 Jn 1:2).<\/p>\n<p>Several passages place the soul alongside the spirit. Luke 1:46 is probably a case of Hebrew poetic parallelism, which expresses the same idea in two different ways. Both terms denote Mary as a person in the depths of her being. Similarly, in Hebrews 4:12, dividing the soul and the spirit is a graphic way of saying how the Word of God probes the inmost recesses of our being. The prayer in 1 Thessalonians 5:23—that the readers may be kept blameless in spirit, soul, and body—is a way of speaking of the whole being. Here soul probably suggests physical existence, as in Genesis 2:7 and 1 Corinthians 2:14, whereas spirit may imply the higher or “spiritual” side of life.<\/p>\n<p>In other passages, the emotions, the will, and even the mind come to the fore, though in each case there is the accompanying idea of a person’s inmost being. People are to love God with all the soul (Mt 22:37; Mk 12:30; cf. Dt 6:5). The expression “from the soul” (Eph 6:6; Col 3:23) means “from the heart,” with all one’s being. In Philippians 1:27 believers are called to be of one mind (cf. Acts 4:32; 14:2). Passages that speak of the soul in relation to salvation include Matthew 10:28; Luke 12:5; Hebrews 6:19; 10:39; 12:3; 13:7; James 1:21; 5:20; 1 Peter 1:9, 22-23; 2:25; 4:19; and Revelation 6:9; 20:4. Such passages speak of the soul either to stress the essential human being, as distinct from the physical body, or to express man’s continued existence with God prior to the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Man; Spirit of Man.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SOUL<\/h3>\n<p>Term translating the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuche<\/span> and the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nephesh<\/span><em>.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The Greek philosopher Plato (fourth century <span>BC<\/span>) perceived the soul as the eternal element in humans; whereas the body perishes at death, the soul is indestructible. At death the soul enters another body; if it has been wicked in this life, it may be sent into an inferior human being or even an animal or bird. By means of transmigration from one body to another, the soul is eventually purged of evil. In the early centuries of the Christian era, Gnosticism also taught that the body was the prison house of the soul. Redemption comes to those initiated into the Gnostic secrets, leading to the release of the soul from the body.<\/p>\n<p>Biblical thought about the soul is different. In the OT the soul signifies that which is vital to humans in the broadest sense. The Hebrew and Greek words for soul often can be translated as “life”; occasionally, they can be used for the life of creatures (Gn 1:20; Lv 11:10). “Soul for soul” means “life for life” (Ex 21:23). In legal writings, a soul refers to a person in relation to a particular law (e.g., “If a soul shall sin . . . ,” Lv 4:2, <span>kjv<\/span>). When people were counted, they were counted as souls, that is, persons (Ex 1:5; Dt 10:22).<\/p>\n<p>In a narrower sense, the soul denotes human emotions and inner powers. People are called to love God with all their heart and soul (Dt 13:3). Knowledge and understanding (Ps 139:14), thought (1 Sm 20:3), love (1 Sm 18:1), and memory (Lam 3:20) all originate in the soul. Here the soul comes close to what today would be called the self, one’s person, personality, or ego.<\/p>\n<p>There is no suggestion in the OT of the transmigration of the soul as an immaterial, immortal entity. Man is a unity of body and soul—terms that describe not so much two separate entities in a person as much as one person from different standpoints. Hence, in the description of man’s creation in Genesis 2:7, the phrase “a living soul” (<span>kjv<\/span>) is better translated as “a living being.” The thought is not that men and women became <em>souls,<\/em> for clearly they had bodies. The use of the word in the original draws attention to the vital aspect of humans as “living beings.” The Hebrew view of the unity of the person may help to explain why people in the OT had only a shadowy view of life after death, for it would be difficult to conceive how people could exist without a body (Pss 16:10; 49:15; 88:3-12). Where hope of an afterlife exists, it is not because of the intrinsic character of the soul itself (as in Plato). It is grounded in confidence in the God who has power over death and the belief that communion with him cannot be broken even by death (Ex 3:6; 1 Sm 2:6; Jb 19:25-26; Pss 16:10-11; 73:24-25; Is 25:8; 26:19; Dn 12:2; Hos 6:1-3; 13:14).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the word for soul (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuche<\/span>) has a range of meanings similar to that in the OT. Often it is synonymous with life itself. Followers of Jesus are said to have risked their lives (souls) for his sake (Acts 15:26; cf. Jn 13:37; Rom 16:4; Phil 2:30). As the Son of Man, Jesus came not to be served but to serve and to give his life (soul) as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). As the Good Shepherd, he lays down his life (soul) for the sheep (Jn 10:14, 17-18). In Luke 14:26 the condition of discipleship is to hate one’s soul, that is, to be willing to deny oneself to the point of losing one’s life for Christ’s sake (cf. Lk 9:23; Rv 12:11).<\/p>\n<p>Frequently “soul” can mean “person” (Acts 2:43; 3:23; 7:14; Rom 2:9; 13:1; 1 Pt 3:20). The expression “every living soul” (Rv 16:3, <span>kjv<\/span>) reflects the vital aspect of living beings. As in the OT, the soul can denote not only the vital aspect of the person on the physical level, but it can also connote one’s emotional energies. It denotes the person himself, the seat of his or her emotions, one’s inmost being. For example, when Jesus was agonizing about his death, he spoke of his soul being crushed (Mt 26:38; Mk 14:34; cf. Ps 42:6). In an entirely different setting, Jesus promised rest to the souls of those who come to him (Mt 11:29). Here, as elsewhere, “soul” denotes the essential person (cf. Lk 2:35; 2 Cor 1:23; 2 Thes 2:8; 3 Jn 1:2).<\/p>\n<p>Several passages place the soul alongside the spirit. Luke 1:46 is probably a case of Hebrew poetic parallelism, which expresses the same idea in two different ways. Both terms denote Mary as a person in the depths of her being. Similarly, in Hebrews 4:12, dividing the soul and the spirit is a graphic way of saying how the Word of God probes the inmost recesses of our being. The prayer in 1 Thessalonians 5:23—that the readers may be kept blameless in spirit, soul, and body—is a way of speaking of the whole being. Here soul probably suggests physical existence, as in Genesis 2:7 and 1 Corinthians 2:14, whereas spirit may imply the higher or “spiritual” side of life.<\/p>\n<p>In other passages, the emotions, the will, and even the mind come to the fore, though in each case there is the accompanying idea of a person’s inmost being. People are to love God with all the soul (Mt 22:37; Mk 12:30; cf. Dt 6:5). The expression “from the soul” (Eph 6:6; Col 3:23) means “from the heart,” with all one’s being. In Philippians 1:27 believers are called to be of one mind (cf. Acts 4:32; 14:2). Passages that speak of the soul in relation to salvation include Matthew 10:28; Luke 12:5; Hebrews 6:19; 10:39; 12:3; 13:7; James 1:21; 5:20; 1 Peter 1:9, 22-23; 2:25; 4:19; and Revelation 6:9; 20:4. Such passages speak of the soul either to stress the essential human being, as distinct from the physical body, or to express man’s continued existence with God prior to the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Man; Spirit of Man.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SOUL Term translating the Greek word psuche and the Hebrew nephesh. The Greek philosopher Plato (fourth century BC) perceived the soul as the eternal element in humans; whereas the body perishes at death, the soul is indestructible. At death the soul enters another body; if it has been wicked in this life, it may be sent into an inferior human being or even an animal or bird. By means of transmigration from one body to another, the soul is eventually purged of evil. In the early centuries of ...","summary_en":"SOUL Term translating the Greek word psuche and the Hebrew nephesh. The Greek philosopher Plato (fourth century BC) perceived the soul as the eternal element in humans; whereas the body perishes at death, the soul is indestructible. At death the soul enters another body; if it has been wicked in this life, it may be sent into an inferior human being or even an animal or bird. By means of transmigration from one body to another, the soul is eventually purged of evil. In the early centuries of ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":39569,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Yoke","title_en":"Yoke","content_ro":"<h3>YOKE<\/h3>\n<p>The wooden bar that allowed two (or more) draft animals to be coupled (yoked) so that they might effectively work together (Nm 19:2; 1 Kgs 19:19; Jb 1:3). In addition to this literal usage, the Bible frequently uses the term metaphorically to refer to work or bondage (Lv 26:13). The yoke of bondage was applied not only by foreign oppressors but often by Israel’s own kings as well (1 Kgs 12:4-14; 2 Chr 10:4-14). In prophetic writings, the yoke of bondage was generally associated with divine judgment (Lam 1:14), so that deliverance was represented as God breaking the yoke that had enslaved Israel (Is 9:4; 10:27; 14:25; 58:6; Jer 2:20; 5:5). The yoke of bondage figured prominently in Jeremiah’s dispute with Hananiah’s prophecy concerning Judah’s imminent release from Babylonian captivity (Jer 27:8-11; 28:1-17). In the NT, Jesus transforms “yoke” into a positive term by calling on people to take up his yoke, which is not burdensome, and he will give them rest for their souls (Mt 11:29-30).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>YOKE<\/h3>\n<p>The wooden bar that allowed two (or more) draft animals to be coupled (yoked) so that they might effectively work together (Nm 19:2; 1 Kgs 19:19; Jb 1:3). In addition to this literal usage, the Bible frequently uses the term metaphorically to refer to work or bondage (Lv 26:13). The yoke of bondage was applied not only by foreign oppressors but often by Israel’s own kings as well (1 Kgs 12:4-14; 2 Chr 10:4-14). In prophetic writings, the yoke of bondage was generally associated with divine judgment (Lam 1:14), so that deliverance was represented as God breaking the yoke that had enslaved Israel (Is 9:4; 10:27; 14:25; 58:6; Jer 2:20; 5:5). The yoke of bondage figured prominently in Jeremiah’s dispute with Hananiah’s prophecy concerning Judah’s imminent release from Babylonian captivity (Jer 27:8-11; 28:1-17). In the NT, Jesus transforms “yoke” into a positive term by calling on people to take up his yoke, which is not burdensome, and he will give them rest for their souls (Mt 11:29-30).<\/p>","summary_ro":"YOKE The wooden bar that allowed two (or more) draft animals to be coupled (yoked) so that they might effectively work together (Nm 19:2; 1 Kgs 19:19; Jb 1:3). In addition to this literal usage, the Bible frequently uses the term metaphorically to refer to work or bondage (Lv 26:13). The yoke of bondage was applied not only by foreign oppressors but often by Israel’s own kings as well (1 Kgs 12:4-14; 2 Chr 10:4-14). In prophetic writings, the yoke of bondage was generally associated with divi...","summary_en":"YOKE The wooden bar that allowed two (or more) draft animals to be coupled (yoked) so that they might effectively work together (Nm 19:2; 1 Kgs 19:19; Jb 1:3). In addition to this literal usage, the Bible frequently uses the term metaphorically to refer to work or bondage (Lv 26:13). The yoke of bondage was applied not only by foreign oppressors but often by Israel’s own kings as well (1 Kgs 12:4-14; 2 Chr 10:4-14). In prophetic writings, the yoke of bondage was generally associated with divi...","source":"Articles\/XY.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54710,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:29","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:29-30<\/strong> A <em>yoke<\/em>, which forms a harness between two animals, is a metaphor for the demands of discipleship. In contrast to the “yoke” of the religious leaders, Jesus’ yoke is <em>easy<\/em> and <em>light<\/em>, not because it is less demanding (see 7:13-14), but because the power of the Messiah (by the Holy Spirit) makes it possible (see Acts 15:10; 1 Jn 5:3). The religious demands of Israel’s spiritual leaders (Matt 23:4; Acts 15:10) included 613 Old Testament commands and their expansion through tradition. Jesus urged those who were suffering from the burdens of the Pharisees’ stipulations to come to him (Matt 11:28) in order to find the salvation their hearts desired. It is a call to salvation involving a life of obedience to Jesus’ new teachings. People are invited to enter a relationship with a <em>humble and gentle<\/em> teacher.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:29-30<\/strong> A <em>yoke<\/em>, which forms a harness between two animals, is a metaphor for the demands of discipleship. In contrast to the “yoke” of the religious leaders, Jesus’ yoke is <em>easy<\/em> and <em>light<\/em>, not because it is less demanding (see 7:13-14), but because the power of the Messiah (by the Holy Spirit) makes it possible (see Acts 15:10; 1 Jn 5:3). The religious demands of Israel’s spiritual leaders (Matt 23:4; Acts 15:10) included 613 Old Testament commands and their expansion through tradition. Jesus urged those who were suffering from the burdens of the Pharisees’ stipulations to come to him (Matt 11:28) in order to find the salvation their hearts desired. It is a call to salvation involving a life of obedience to Jesus’ new teachings. People are invited to enter a relationship with a <em>humble and gentle<\/em> teacher.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:29-30 A yoke, which forms a harness between two animals, is a metaphor for the demands of discipleship. In contrast to the “yoke” of the religious leaders, Jesus’ yoke is easy and light, not because it is less demanding (see 7:13-14), but because the power of the Messiah (by the Holy Spirit) makes it possible (see Acts 15:10; 1 Jn 5:3). The religious demands of Israel’s spiritual leaders (Matt 23:4; Acts 15:10) included 613 Old Testament commands and their expansion through tradition. Jesu...","summary_en":"11:29-30 A yoke, which forms a harness between two animals, is a metaphor for the demands of discipleship. In contrast to the “yoke” of the religious leaders, Jesus’ yoke is easy and light, not because it is less demanding (see 7:13-14), but because the power of the Messiah (by the Holy Spirit) makes it possible (see Acts 15:10; 1 Jn 5:3). The religious demands of Israel’s spiritual leaders (Matt 23:4; Acts 15:10) included 613 Old Testament commands and their expansion through tradition. Jesu...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82336,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:29","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:29-30<\/strong> A <em>yoke<\/em>, which forms a harness between two animals, is a metaphor for the demands of discipleship. In contrast to the “yoke” of the religious leaders, Jesus’ yoke is <em>easy<\/em> and <em>light<\/em>, not because it is less demanding (see 7:13-14), but because the power of the Messiah (by the Holy Spirit) makes it possible (see Acts 15:10; 1 Jn 5:3). The religious demands of Israel’s spiritual leaders (Matt 23:4; Acts 15:10) included 613 Old Testament commands and their expansion through tradition. Jesus urged those who were suffering from the burdens of the Pharisees’ stipulations to come to him (Matt 11:28) in order to find the salvation their hearts desired. It is a call to salvation involving a life of obedience to Jesus’ new teachings. People are invited to enter a relationship with a <em>humble and gentle<\/em> teacher.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:29-30<\/strong> A <em>yoke<\/em>, which forms a harness between two animals, is a metaphor for the demands of discipleship. In contrast to the “yoke” of the religious leaders, Jesus’ yoke is <em>easy<\/em> and <em>light<\/em>, not because it is less demanding (see 7:13-14), but because the power of the Messiah (by the Holy Spirit) makes it possible (see Acts 15:10; 1 Jn 5:3). The religious demands of Israel’s spiritual leaders (Matt 23:4; Acts 15:10) included 613 Old Testament commands and their expansion through tradition. Jesus urged those who were suffering from the burdens of the Pharisees’ stipulations to come to him (Matt 11:28) in order to find the salvation their hearts desired. It is a call to salvation involving a life of obedience to Jesus’ new teachings. People are invited to enter a relationship with a <em>humble and gentle<\/em> teacher.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:29-30 A yoke, which forms a harness between two animals, is a metaphor for the demands of discipleship. In contrast to the “yoke” of the religious leaders, Jesus’ yoke is easy and light, not because it is less demanding (see 7:13-14), but because the power of the Messiah (by the Holy Spirit) makes it possible (see Acts 15:10; 1 Jn 5:3). The religious demands of Israel’s spiritual leaders (Matt 23:4; Acts 15:10) included 613 Old Testament commands and their expansion through tradition. Jesu...","summary_en":"11:29-30 A yoke, which forms a harness between two animals, is a metaphor for the demands of discipleship. In contrast to the “yoke” of the religious leaders, Jesus’ yoke is easy and light, not because it is less demanding (see 7:13-14), but because the power of the Messiah (by the Holy Spirit) makes it possible (see Acts 15:10; 1 Jn 5:3). The religious demands of Israel’s spiritual leaders (Matt 23:4; Acts 15:10) included 613 Old Testament commands and their expansion through tradition. Jesu...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":109962,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:29","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:29-30<\/strong> A <em>yoke<\/em>, which forms a harness between two animals, is a metaphor for the demands of discipleship. In contrast to the “yoke” of the religious leaders, Jesus’ yoke is <em>easy<\/em> and <em>light<\/em>, not because it is less demanding (see 7:13-14), but because the power of the Messiah (by the Holy Spirit) makes it possible (see Acts 15:10; 1 Jn 5:3). The religious demands of Israel’s spiritual leaders (Matt 23:4; Acts 15:10) included 613 Old Testament commands and their expansion through tradition. Jesus urged those who were suffering from the burdens of the Pharisees’ stipulations to come to him (Matt 11:28) in order to find the salvation their hearts desired. It is a call to salvation involving a life of obedience to Jesus’ new teachings. People are invited to enter a relationship with a <em>humble and gentle<\/em> teacher.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:29-30<\/strong> A <em>yoke<\/em>, which forms a harness between two animals, is a metaphor for the demands of discipleship. In contrast to the “yoke” of the religious leaders, Jesus’ yoke is <em>easy<\/em> and <em>light<\/em>, not because it is less demanding (see 7:13-14), but because the power of the Messiah (by the Holy Spirit) makes it possible (see Acts 15:10; 1 Jn 5:3). The religious demands of Israel’s spiritual leaders (Matt 23:4; Acts 15:10) included 613 Old Testament commands and their expansion through tradition. Jesus urged those who were suffering from the burdens of the Pharisees’ stipulations to come to him (Matt 11:28) in order to find the salvation their hearts desired. It is a call to salvation involving a life of obedience to Jesus’ new teachings. People are invited to enter a relationship with a <em>humble and gentle<\/em> teacher.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:29-30 A yoke, which forms a harness between two animals, is a metaphor for the demands of discipleship. In contrast to the “yoke” of the religious leaders, Jesus’ yoke is easy and light, not because it is less demanding (see 7:13-14), but because the power of the Messiah (by the Holy Spirit) makes it possible (see Acts 15:10; 1 Jn 5:3). The religious demands of Israel’s spiritual leaders (Matt 23:4; Acts 15:10) included 613 Old Testament commands and their expansion through tradition. Jesu...","summary_en":"11:29-30 A yoke, which forms a harness between two animals, is a metaphor for the demands of discipleship. In contrast to the “yoke” of the religious leaders, Jesus’ yoke is easy and light, not because it is less demanding (see 7:13-14), but because the power of the Messiah (by the Holy Spirit) makes it possible (see Acts 15:10; 1 Jn 5:3). The religious demands of Israel’s spiritual leaders (Matt 23:4; Acts 15:10) included 613 Old Testament commands and their expansion through tradition. Jesu...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137588,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 11:29","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 11:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>11:29-30<\/strong> A <em>yoke<\/em>, which forms a harness between two animals, is a metaphor for the demands of discipleship. In contrast to the “yoke” of the religious leaders, Jesus’ yoke is <em>easy<\/em> and <em>light<\/em>, not because it is less demanding (see 7:13-14), but because the power of the Messiah (by the Holy Spirit) makes it possible (see Acts 15:10; 1 Jn 5:3). The religious demands of Israel’s spiritual leaders (Matt 23:4; Acts 15:10) included 613 Old Testament commands and their expansion through tradition. Jesus urged those who were suffering from the burdens of the Pharisees’ stipulations to come to him (Matt 11:28) in order to find the salvation their hearts desired. It is a call to salvation involving a life of obedience to Jesus’ new teachings. People are invited to enter a relationship with a <em>humble and gentle<\/em> teacher.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>11:29-30<\/strong> A <em>yoke<\/em>, which forms a harness between two animals, is a metaphor for the demands of discipleship. In contrast to the “yoke” of the religious leaders, Jesus’ yoke is <em>easy<\/em> and <em>light<\/em>, not because it is less demanding (see 7:13-14), but because the power of the Messiah (by the Holy Spirit) makes it possible (see Acts 15:10; 1 Jn 5:3). The religious demands of Israel’s spiritual leaders (Matt 23:4; Acts 15:10) included 613 Old Testament commands and their expansion through tradition. Jesus urged those who were suffering from the burdens of the Pharisees’ stipulations to come to him (Matt 11:28) in order to find the salvation their hearts desired. It is a call to salvation involving a life of obedience to Jesus’ new teachings. People are invited to enter a relationship with a <em>humble and gentle<\/em> teacher.<\/p>","summary_ro":"11:29-30 A yoke, which forms a harness between two animals, is a metaphor for the demands of discipleship. In contrast to the “yoke” of the religious leaders, Jesus’ yoke is easy and light, not because it is less demanding (see 7:13-14), but because the power of the Messiah (by the Holy Spirit) makes it possible (see Acts 15:10; 1 Jn 5:3). The religious demands of Israel’s spiritual leaders (Matt 23:4; Acts 15:10) included 613 Old Testament commands and their expansion through tradition. Jesu...","summary_en":"11:29-30 A yoke, which forms a harness between two animals, is a metaphor for the demands of discipleship. In contrast to the “yoke” of the religious leaders, Jesus’ yoke is easy and light, not because it is less demanding (see 7:13-14), but because the power of the Messiah (by the Holy Spirit) makes it possible (see Acts 15:10; 1 Jn 5:3). The religious demands of Israel’s spiritual leaders (Matt 23:4; Acts 15:10) included 613 Old Testament commands and their expansion through tradition. Jesu...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}]},"labels":{"article":"Articol","map":"Hartă","chart":"Diagramă","textbox":"Notă explicativă","picture":"Imagine","profile":"Profil","study_note":"Notă de studiu","theme_note":"Temă biblică"},"icons":{"article":"📖","map":"🗺️","chart":"📊","textbox":"💡","picture":"🖼️","profile":"👤","study_note":"📝","theme_note":"🎯"},"typeColors":{"article":"#d4af37","map":"#2d7d46","chart":"#3b82f6","textbox":"#8b5cf6","picture":"#ec4899","profile":"#f59e0b","study_note":"#06b6d4","theme_note":"#ef4444"}}