Rut 4
1 Boaz s-a suit la poarta cetăţii, şi s-a oprit acolo. Şi iată că cel ce avea drept de răscumpărare, şi despre care vorbise Boaz, trecea. Boaz i-a zis: ,,Hei, cutare, apropie-te, stai aici.`` Şi el s-a apropiat, şi s-a oprit.
2 Boaz a luat atunci zece oameni dintre bătrânii cetăţii, şi a zis: ,,Şedeţi aici.`` Şi ei au şezut jos.
3 Apoi a zis celui ce avea drept de răscumpărare: ,,Naomi, întorcându-se din ţara Moabului, a vândut bucata de pământ care era a fratelui nostru Elimelec.
4 Am crezut de datoria mea să te înştiinţez despre aceasta, şi să-ţi spun: ,Cumpără-o, în faţa locuitorilor şi în faţa bătrânilor poporului meu. Dacă vrei s-o răscumperi, răscumpără-o; dar dacă nu vrei, spune-mi, ca să ştiu. Căci nu este nimeni înaintea ta care să aibă dreptul de răscumpărare, şi după tine eu am dreptul acesta.`` Şi el a răspuns: ,,O voi răscumpăra.``
5 Boaz a zis: ,,În ziua în care vei cumpăra ţarina din mâna Naomei, o vei cumpăra în acelaş timp şi dela Rut, Moabita, nevasta celui mort, ca să ridici numele mortului în moştenirea lui.``
6 Şi cel ce avea drept de răscumpărare a răspuns: ,,Nu pot s-o răscumpăr pe socoteala mea, de frică să nu-mi stric moştenirea mea; ia tu dreptul de răscumpărare, căci eu nu pot s-o răscumpăr.``
7 Odinioară în Israel, pentru întărirea unei răscumpărări sau unui schimb, omul îşi scotea încălţămintea şi o dădea celuilalt: aceasta slujea ca mărturie în Israel.
8 Cel ce avea drept de răscumpărare a zis dar lui Boaz: ,,Cumpără-o pe socoteala ta!`` Şi şi-a scos încălţămintea.
9 Atunci Boaz a zis bătrânilor şi întregului popor: ,,Voi sânteţi martori azi că am cumpărat din mâna Naomei tot ce era al lui Elimelec, al lui Chilion şi al lui Mahlon,
10 şi că mi-am cumpărat deasemenea de nevastă pe Rut, Moabita, nevasta lui Mahlon, ca să ridic numele mortului în moştenirea lui, şi pentru ca numele mortului să nu fie şters dintre fraţii lui şi din poarta locului lui. Voi sânteţi martori azi despre aceasta!``
11 Tot poporul care era la poartă şi bătrânii au zis: ,,Sântem martori! Domnul să facă pe femeia care intră în casa ta ca Rahela şi ca Lea, cari amândouă au zidit casa lui Israel! Arată-ţi puterea în Efrata, şi fă-ţi un nume în Betleem!
12 Sămânţa pe care ţi-o va da Domnul, prin această tânără femeie, să-ţi facă o casă asemenea casei lui Pereţ, care s-a născut lui Iuda din Tamar!``
13 Boaz a luat pe Rut, care i-a fost nevastă, şi el a intrat la ea. Domnul a făcut-o să zămislească, şi ea a născut un fiu.
14 Femeile au zis Naomei: ,,Binecuvântat să fie Domnul, care nu te-a lăsat lipsită azi de un bărbat cu drept de răscumpărare, şi al cărui nume va fi lăudat în Israel!
15 Copilul acesta îţi va înviora sufletul, şi va fi sprijinul bătrâneţelor tale; căci l-a născut noru-ta, care te iubeşte, şi care face pentru tine mai mult decât şapte fii.``
16 Naomi a luat copilul, l-a ţinut în braţe, şi a văzut de el.
17 Vecinele i-au pus nume, zicând: ,,Un fiu s-a născut Naomei!`` Şi l-au numit Obed. Acesta a fost tatăl lui Isai, tatăl lui David.
18 Iată sămânţa lui Pereţ. Pereţ a fost tatăl lui Heţron;
19 Heţron a fost tatăl lui Ram; Ram a fost tatăl lui Aminadab;
20 Aminadab a fost tatăl lui Nahşon: Nahşon a fost tatăl lui Salmon;
21 Salmon a fost tatăl lui Boaz; Boaz a fost tatăl lui Obed;
22 Obed a fost tatăl lui Isai; şi Isai a fost tatăl lui David
{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":10293,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Elder","title_en":"Elder","content_ro":"<h3>ELDER<\/h3>\n<p>Person who, by virtue of position in the family, clan, or tribe; or by reason of personality, prowess, stature, or influence; or through a process of appointment and ordination, exercised leadership and judicial functions in both religious and secular spheres in the ancient world, both among biblical and nonbiblical peoples. The roots of the development of the presbytery (group of elders) in the NT and postapostolic church originate in Judaism and the OT, though the figure of the elder or groups of elders can also be found in the world surrounding ancient Israel and in the Greco-Roman world of the NT period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The elder, or the institution of elders, is closely linked with the tribal system. Tribes were composed of clans, and clans of large, extended family units. By virtue of age and function in a patriarchal society, the father of a family ruled. This fact of age, as well as the wisdom and maturity invested in older persons, is undoubtedly the origin of the authority that these elders exercised. A clan was ruled by the heads of the families constituting it, forming a council of elders. In time of war, each clan furnished a contingent; these were led by a chief, probably chosen from the ranks of the elders.<\/p>\n<p>In Israel’s premonarchy period, local administration and judicial action was largely in the hands of those elders. In the exodus narrative, it was the elders of Israel (heads of families) who were instructed by Moses concerning the first Passover meal (Ex 12:21-22). It was these elders who, in Exodus 18:12, met with Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, and from whose ranks were chosen worthy representatives to assist Moses in the interpretation of the law of God and the administration of justice (18:13-23). Similarly, according to Numbers 11:16-17, Moses was instructed by God to select 70 men from among the elders of Israel to assist him in leadership of the people. In this latter account, the elders were marked by a special endowment of God’s Spirit. In the former the elders—chosen as coadministrators with Moses—were those known to be trustworthy.<\/p>\n<p>A central function of elders was the administration of justice. They were the “judges,” who sat “in the gate,” the traditional courtroom of ancient villages and towns. Here disputes and trials were settled by the elders, and community affairs were discussed and decisions made (Gn 23:10, 18; Jb 29:7; Prv 24:7; 31:23). The preservation and application of the law was clearly in the hands of elders who sat at the gate of the town (Dt 19:12; 21:19; 22:15; 25:7-10). Ruth 4:1-12 provides an excellent description of such a process.<\/p>\n<p>During the period of the monarchy, local administration and judicial authority continued to be invested in councils of elders. At the end of Saul’s reign, David sent messages and gifts to the elders of the towns of Judah (1 Sm 30:26), obviously recognizing that his efficient rule would depend on their goodwill and allegiance. In the time of Jehu (2 Kgs 10:5), we hear of elders in Samaria, side by side with a governor and master of the palace. To facilitate her plot against Naboth, Jezebel wrote instructions to the elders and nobles of Jezreel (1 Kgs 21:8-11). Again, Josiah convened the elders of Judah and Jerusalem to hear the reading of the law and to enter with him into a new covenant of obedience (2 Kgs 23:1). It is clear that the elders of Israel were now responsible for the application of the law within their jurisdictions. Besides administrative and judicial functions, elders also assumed cultic roles (Ex 24:1, 9; Lv 4:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the elders survived the collapse of the royal institutions. Elders were present during the exile (Ez 8:1; 14:1; 20:1-3) as well as after the return (e.g., Ezr 10:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InJudaismoftheNewTestamentPeriod\">In Judaism of the New Testament Period<\/p>\n<p>While use of the title “elder” to designate officers of various Greek cult associations and village magistrates may have influenced the development of community structure in the gentile churches, the Christian office (or function) of elder stems from a very similar institution within Judaism. In the first three Gospels and in Acts there are numerous references to elders as functionaries within the communal and religious life of Judaism. Generally they are mentioned together with one or more other groups of functionaries (quoting the <span>rsv<\/span>): “elders and chief priests and scribes” (Mt 16:21); “chief priests and elders of the people” (21:23; 26:3, 47); “scribes and elders” (26:57; 27:41); “chief priests and elders” (27:1, 3, 12, 20); “rulers and elders and scribes” (Acts 4:5); “rulers of the people and elders” (v 8). From these NT passages we cannot determine what exactly their functions were, or how they differed from rulers or scribes. However, the duties of Jewish elders are clearly described in the tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> in the Mishnah, as well as in the community rule books of the Qumran ascetics, discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>Each Jewish community had its council of elders, who had general administrative oversight and represented the community in relations with Roman authorities. Their primary duty was judicial. They were custodians of the law and its traditional interpretations (see Mt 15:2), and they were charged with both its enforcement and the punishment of offenders. The most important of these councils of elders was the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem, a group of 71 men who acted as the final court for the entire nation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheChristianCommunity\">In the Christian Community<\/p>\n<p>Since the primitive church eventually regarded itself as the new Israel (Mt 21:43; Gal 6:16), it is easy to see why it should gradually adopt the institution of elders. Though it is difficult to make out the order that prevailed in the first Christian communities, because it apparently varied according to place and time in both form and extent, the presence and functioning of elders was part of the reality of early church life.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke’s account of the origin and spread of Christianity, the elders are already present in the church at Jerusalem. In Acts we see Christians at Antioch sending famine relief “to the elders [of the Judean churches] by Barnabas and Saul” (Acts 11:30). On their first missionary journey, Paul and Barnabas “appointed elders in every church” (14:23). Later, Paul and Barnabas were sent from Antioch to Jerusalem “to the apostles and elders” about the question of circumcision of gentile Christians (15:2), and were “welcomed by the church, and the apostles, and the elders” (v 4), who gathered to hear the case and resolve the issue (vv 6-23).<\/p>\n<p>Who these elders were, and how they were chosen, we are not told. It seems possible to argue, on the basis of Jewish precedent, that age and prominence gave them the privilege of rendering special service within the community. Veneration for age was a deeply rooted sentiment among Jews, and the name “presbyter” (elder) was derived from Jewish usage. It is also possible that, like the appointment of “the seven” for special service by the laying on of hands (6:1-6), the first elders in the Jerusalem church were appointed by the apostles. Apparently they functioned in the Christian community in ways comparable to the elders in the Jewish communities and the Sanhedrin (11:30; 15:2-6, 22-23; 16:4; 21:18).<\/p>\n<p>Paul apparently continued the practice among the gentile churches, though elders are not mentioned in the earliest Pauline writings. They are mentioned only in the Pastoral Epistles (1 Tm 5:17, 19; Ti 1:5). On his last journey to Jerusalem, Paul summoned the elders of the church at Ephesus to Miletus (Acts 20:17) to bid them farewell, and to instruct them to be faithful in their task of overseeing and caring for the Christian flock, the church of God (20:28).<\/p>\n<p>Although elders are not explicitly mentioned in Paul’s early letters, they may have been among the leaders who presided over the congregations (Rom 12:8; 1 Thes 5:12-13). Philippians 1:1 certainly reveals a definite stratification of leadership (“overseers and deacons”) within a young Pauline congregation. And 1 Timothy 5:17, reflecting what is often considered a later phase in the development of church government, attributes the functions of preaching and teaching to the ruling elders. Further, that Christian elders exercised pastoral functions may be inferred from 1 Peter 5:1-5 and James 5:14.<\/p>\n<p>There is one passage where we find a possible identification of an apostle (Peter) as also being an elder: “I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ” (1 Pt 5:1a, <span>rsv<\/span>). This text may indicate that elders were appointed and functioned as extensions of apostolic servanthood. Paul’s practice of appointing elders in the churches before his departure may support such a suggestion. The fact that in the tradition of the later church the “elder” of 2 and 3 John was identified as the apostle John points in a similar direction. Though such an identification is implicit, the apostles could function as elders but not the other way around.<\/p>\n<p>The elders had several functions. For example, 1 Timothy 5:17 speaks of elders as involved in preaching and teaching; James 5:14 sees them involved in a healing ministry; 1 Peter 5:2 exhorts them to tend the flock. Thus, the prophets and teachers who led the church at Antioch (according to Acts 13:1-3) may well have been the elders of this community.<\/p>\n<p>The diaconate, too, whose roots are to be seen in the selection of “the seven” for service to those in need (Acts 6:1-3), was not restricted to purely external service. Two of these men, whom Luke introduces to us as deacons, appear at the same time as evangelists who were particularly effective as preachers of the Word, performers of miracles, expounders of the Scriptures (Stephen, Acts 6:8-10; Philip, Acts 8:4-13, 26-40).<\/p>\n<p>Whereas in the later church bishops and elders were clearly distinguished, the NT reflects an early period when these offices were virtually synonymous. In Paul’s farewell speech at Miletus (Acts 20), addressed specifically to the Ephesian church elders (v 17), he tells them that the Holy Spirit has made them “overseers, to care for the church of God” (v 28). Whether “overseer” is used here in the later technical sense of bishop or the more general sense of guardian is not clear. However, in Titus 1:5-7, the elders of verse 5 are clearly the same persons as the bishops of verse 7. Again, the bishops of Philippians 1:1 are likely to be understood as the elders appointed by Paul upon his leaving this mission station.<\/p>\n<p>It is clear that church government in the NT period was still relatively fluid, but the seeds for the later structures were surely planted. The institution of the elders, on the basis of Jewish precedent, was central. The episcopate (overseers\/bishops) probably emerged out of the presbyterian (elders), one elder being appointed as overseer by the entire council of elders.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bishop; Deacon, Deaconess; Pastor; Presbyter; Spiritual Gifts.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ELDER<\/h3>\n<p>Person who, by virtue of position in the family, clan, or tribe; or by reason of personality, prowess, stature, or influence; or through a process of appointment and ordination, exercised leadership and judicial functions in both religious and secular spheres in the ancient world, both among biblical and nonbiblical peoples. The roots of the development of the presbytery (group of elders) in the NT and postapostolic church originate in Judaism and the OT, though the figure of the elder or groups of elders can also be found in the world surrounding ancient Israel and in the Greco-Roman world of the NT period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The elder, or the institution of elders, is closely linked with the tribal system. Tribes were composed of clans, and clans of large, extended family units. By virtue of age and function in a patriarchal society, the father of a family ruled. This fact of age, as well as the wisdom and maturity invested in older persons, is undoubtedly the origin of the authority that these elders exercised. A clan was ruled by the heads of the families constituting it, forming a council of elders. In time of war, each clan furnished a contingent; these were led by a chief, probably chosen from the ranks of the elders.<\/p>\n<p>In Israel’s premonarchy period, local administration and judicial action was largely in the hands of those elders. In the exodus narrative, it was the elders of Israel (heads of families) who were instructed by Moses concerning the first Passover meal (Ex 12:21-22). It was these elders who, in Exodus 18:12, met with Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, and from whose ranks were chosen worthy representatives to assist Moses in the interpretation of the law of God and the administration of justice (18:13-23). Similarly, according to Numbers 11:16-17, Moses was instructed by God to select 70 men from among the elders of Israel to assist him in leadership of the people. In this latter account, the elders were marked by a special endowment of God’s Spirit. In the former the elders—chosen as coadministrators with Moses—were those known to be trustworthy.<\/p>\n<p>A central function of elders was the administration of justice. They were the “judges,” who sat “in the gate,” the traditional courtroom of ancient villages and towns. Here disputes and trials were settled by the elders, and community affairs were discussed and decisions made (Gn 23:10, 18; Jb 29:7; Prv 24:7; 31:23). The preservation and application of the law was clearly in the hands of elders who sat at the gate of the town (Dt 19:12; 21:19; 22:15; 25:7-10). Ruth 4:1-12 provides an excellent description of such a process.<\/p>\n<p>During the period of the monarchy, local administration and judicial authority continued to be invested in councils of elders. At the end of Saul’s reign, David sent messages and gifts to the elders of the towns of Judah (1 Sm 30:26), obviously recognizing that his efficient rule would depend on their goodwill and allegiance. In the time of Jehu (2 Kgs 10:5), we hear of elders in Samaria, side by side with a governor and master of the palace. To facilitate her plot against Naboth, Jezebel wrote instructions to the elders and nobles of Jezreel (1 Kgs 21:8-11). Again, Josiah convened the elders of Judah and Jerusalem to hear the reading of the law and to enter with him into a new covenant of obedience (2 Kgs 23:1). It is clear that the elders of Israel were now responsible for the application of the law within their jurisdictions. Besides administrative and judicial functions, elders also assumed cultic roles (Ex 24:1, 9; Lv 4:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the elders survived the collapse of the royal institutions. Elders were present during the exile (Ez 8:1; 14:1; 20:1-3) as well as after the return (e.g., Ezr 10:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InJudaismoftheNewTestamentPeriod\">In Judaism of the New Testament Period<\/p>\n<p>While use of the title “elder” to designate officers of various Greek cult associations and village magistrates may have influenced the development of community structure in the gentile churches, the Christian office (or function) of elder stems from a very similar institution within Judaism. In the first three Gospels and in Acts there are numerous references to elders as functionaries within the communal and religious life of Judaism. Generally they are mentioned together with one or more other groups of functionaries (quoting the <span>rsv<\/span>): “elders and chief priests and scribes” (Mt 16:21); “chief priests and elders of the people” (21:23; 26:3, 47); “scribes and elders” (26:57; 27:41); “chief priests and elders” (27:1, 3, 12, 20); “rulers and elders and scribes” (Acts 4:5); “rulers of the people and elders” (v 8). From these NT passages we cannot determine what exactly their functions were, or how they differed from rulers or scribes. However, the duties of Jewish elders are clearly described in the tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> in the Mishnah, as well as in the community rule books of the Qumran ascetics, discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>Each Jewish community had its council of elders, who had general administrative oversight and represented the community in relations with Roman authorities. Their primary duty was judicial. They were custodians of the law and its traditional interpretations (see Mt 15:2), and they were charged with both its enforcement and the punishment of offenders. The most important of these councils of elders was the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem, a group of 71 men who acted as the final court for the entire nation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheChristianCommunity\">In the Christian Community<\/p>\n<p>Since the primitive church eventually regarded itself as the new Israel (Mt 21:43; Gal 6:16), it is easy to see why it should gradually adopt the institution of elders. Though it is difficult to make out the order that prevailed in the first Christian communities, because it apparently varied according to place and time in both form and extent, the presence and functioning of elders was part of the reality of early church life.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke’s account of the origin and spread of Christianity, the elders are already present in the church at Jerusalem. In Acts we see Christians at Antioch sending famine relief “to the elders [of the Judean churches] by Barnabas and Saul” (Acts 11:30). On their first missionary journey, Paul and Barnabas “appointed elders in every church” (14:23). Later, Paul and Barnabas were sent from Antioch to Jerusalem “to the apostles and elders” about the question of circumcision of gentile Christians (15:2), and were “welcomed by the church, and the apostles, and the elders” (v 4), who gathered to hear the case and resolve the issue (vv 6-23).<\/p>\n<p>Who these elders were, and how they were chosen, we are not told. It seems possible to argue, on the basis of Jewish precedent, that age and prominence gave them the privilege of rendering special service within the community. Veneration for age was a deeply rooted sentiment among Jews, and the name “presbyter” (elder) was derived from Jewish usage. It is also possible that, like the appointment of “the seven” for special service by the laying on of hands (6:1-6), the first elders in the Jerusalem church were appointed by the apostles. Apparently they functioned in the Christian community in ways comparable to the elders in the Jewish communities and the Sanhedrin (11:30; 15:2-6, 22-23; 16:4; 21:18).<\/p>\n<p>Paul apparently continued the practice among the gentile churches, though elders are not mentioned in the earliest Pauline writings. They are mentioned only in the Pastoral Epistles (1 Tm 5:17, 19; Ti 1:5). On his last journey to Jerusalem, Paul summoned the elders of the church at Ephesus to Miletus (Acts 20:17) to bid them farewell, and to instruct them to be faithful in their task of overseeing and caring for the Christian flock, the church of God (20:28).<\/p>\n<p>Although elders are not explicitly mentioned in Paul’s early letters, they may have been among the leaders who presided over the congregations (Rom 12:8; 1 Thes 5:12-13). Philippians 1:1 certainly reveals a definite stratification of leadership (“overseers and deacons”) within a young Pauline congregation. And 1 Timothy 5:17, reflecting what is often considered a later phase in the development of church government, attributes the functions of preaching and teaching to the ruling elders. Further, that Christian elders exercised pastoral functions may be inferred from 1 Peter 5:1-5 and James 5:14.<\/p>\n<p>There is one passage where we find a possible identification of an apostle (Peter) as also being an elder: “I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ” (1 Pt 5:1a, <span>rsv<\/span>). This text may indicate that elders were appointed and functioned as extensions of apostolic servanthood. Paul’s practice of appointing elders in the churches before his departure may support such a suggestion. The fact that in the tradition of the later church the “elder” of 2 and 3 John was identified as the apostle John points in a similar direction. Though such an identification is implicit, the apostles could function as elders but not the other way around.<\/p>\n<p>The elders had several functions. For example, 1 Timothy 5:17 speaks of elders as involved in preaching and teaching; James 5:14 sees them involved in a healing ministry; 1 Peter 5:2 exhorts them to tend the flock. Thus, the prophets and teachers who led the church at Antioch (according to Acts 13:1-3) may well have been the elders of this community.<\/p>\n<p>The diaconate, too, whose roots are to be seen in the selection of “the seven” for service to those in need (Acts 6:1-3), was not restricted to purely external service. Two of these men, whom Luke introduces to us as deacons, appear at the same time as evangelists who were particularly effective as preachers of the Word, performers of miracles, expounders of the Scriptures (Stephen, Acts 6:8-10; Philip, Acts 8:4-13, 26-40).<\/p>\n<p>Whereas in the later church bishops and elders were clearly distinguished, the NT reflects an early period when these offices were virtually synonymous. In Paul’s farewell speech at Miletus (Acts 20), addressed specifically to the Ephesian church elders (v 17), he tells them that the Holy Spirit has made them “overseers, to care for the church of God” (v 28). Whether “overseer” is used here in the later technical sense of bishop or the more general sense of guardian is not clear. However, in Titus 1:5-7, the elders of verse 5 are clearly the same persons as the bishops of verse 7. Again, the bishops of Philippians 1:1 are likely to be understood as the elders appointed by Paul upon his leaving this mission station.<\/p>\n<p>It is clear that church government in the NT period was still relatively fluid, but the seeds for the later structures were surely planted. The institution of the elders, on the basis of Jewish precedent, was central. The episcopate (overseers\/bishops) probably emerged out of the presbyterian (elders), one elder being appointed as overseer by the entire council of elders.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bishop; Deacon, Deaconess; Pastor; Presbyter; Spiritual Gifts.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ELDER Person who, by virtue of position in the family, clan, or tribe; or by reason of personality, prowess, stature, or influence; or through a process of appointment and ordination, exercised leadership and judicial functions in both religious and secular spheres in the ancient world, both among biblical and nonbiblical peoples. The roots of the development of the presbytery (group of elders) in the NT and postapostolic church originate in Judaism and the OT, though the figure of the elder ...","summary_en":"ELDER Person who, by virtue of position in the family, clan, or tribe; or by reason of personality, prowess, stature, or influence; or through a process of appointment and ordination, exercised leadership and judicial functions in both religious and secular spheres in the ancient world, both among biblical and nonbiblical peoples. The roots of the development of the presbytery (group of elders) in the NT and postapostolic church originate in Judaism and the OT, though the figure of the elder ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32425,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ransom","title_en":"Ransom","content_ro":"<h3>RANSOM<\/h3>\n<p>Price for redeeming or liberating slaves, captives, property, or life. Jesus described his entire ministry as one of service in giving his life as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). Hence, “ransom” is closely linked to such terms as “redemption” and “salvation,” to the satisfaction Christ made in atonement for sin.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the OT God provided various regulations for his covenant people whereby life and property could be “redeemed,” “bought back,” or “set free” by payment of ransom (cf. Lv 25–27). Ransom involved a price paid as a substitute for that which was redeemed or set free.<\/p>\n<p>The OT uses three different Hebrew words for ransom or redemption. Only when there is a clear indication of the payment of a price are these terms translated by “ransom.” But even when another term, such as “redemption,” is used in English translation, a ransom price is usually implied.<\/p>\n<p>One of the Hebrew terms (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kopher<\/span>) means a “cover” or a “covering.” It was a replacement payment made in exchange for punishment. A ransom could be paid to redeem the life of the owner of an ox that had gored a person to death (Ex 21:30). A half-shekel ransom price was required by God for each Israelite at census taking to prevent a plague (30:12), and this “atonement money” was an offering to the Lord for use in the tabernacle service. A murderer could not be ransomed, and anyone who found safety in a city of refuge could not be taken back by ransom (Nm 35:31-32). It was impossible to avoid death by paying a ransom (Ps 49:7-9). But in a few instances the term takes on the meaning of a “bribe” or “hush money” (1 Sm 12:3; Prv 6:35; Am 5:12).<\/p>\n<p>A second Hebrew word-family for “ransom” and “redemption” is related to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span><em>.<\/em> <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Go’el<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning a “reclaimant” or “redeemer,” derives from the root meaning of the Hebrew term “to restore, repair, deliver, rescue.” The term refers to God’s family-law regulations that place various obligations on a relative or kinsman (Lv 25:25-55). The kinsman had the right and duty of redeeming by ransom any family property that a person was compelled to sell (Lv 25:25-34; Ru 4:4-6); of ransoming a relative who was compelled by poverty to sell himself as a slave to a stranger or sojourner (Lv 25:47-55); and of acting as avenger of the blood of a dead relative, thus enforcing the claim for satisfaction for shedding his blood (Nm 35:19-27; Jos 20:3-5). The kinsman was also obligated to marry the wife of a dead brother who had died without leaving children so that the kinsman might raise up seed and the brother’s name not be forgotten in Israel (Ru 3:9-13; 4:1-12). In a general sense the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> was a “vindicator” or “redeemer”; a familiar example is Job’s cry for God to vindicate him (Jb 19:25). In the highest sense, God is the kinsman and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> of Israel, redeeming them from the bondage of Egypt (Ex 6:5-7), from captivity in Babylon, and from distress in general (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> occurs 13 times in Is 40–46). Thus Israel is called “the ransomed of the Lord” (Is 35:10), having been “redeemed without money” (52:3). In such contexts, however, the cost is indicated in terms of God’s might and power.<\/p>\n<p>The OT uses a third Hebrew word (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">pidyon<\/span>) from the area of commercial law for ransom or payment. Since God spared the firstborn in Israel at the time of Passover, the first offspring of every womb belonged to God, and the oldest male was redeemed by ransom (Ex 13:12-15; 34:20; Lv 27:27; Nm 18:15-17). Later the entire tribe of Levi was set aside as priestly substitutes for the firstborn. Since there were 273 more firstborn than Levites, a payment of five shekels was paid in ransom for each (Nm 3:40-46). This term was also used for the price paid to ransom a slave from slavery (Dt 15:15; 24:18); a slave concubine could also be ransomed (Ex 21:8-11; Lv 19:20). God motivates these provisions by his own ransoming of Israel as slaves in Egypt (Dt 15:15; 24:18). This Hebrew term is also applied to God’s deliverance of Israel from Egypt (Dt 7:8; 9:26; 13:5; 2 Sm 7:23; 1 Chr 17:21; Ps 78:42) and from Babylonian captivity (Is 35:10; 51:11). Sometimes God ransoms without reference to a specific occasion (Hos 7:13; cf. Dt 21:8; Neh 1:10; Is 1:27; Jer 31:11). God also ransoms from the grave (Hos 13:14), from iniquities (Ps 130:8), and from troubles (25:22). This deliverance always implies some sort of payment or cost, such as “the mighty power” or “strong hand” of God needed for the redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT there is just one family of words used for ransom. The term basically means “to loose” or “to set free.” It denotes releasing, redeeming, or liberating on payment of the ransom price. The translation “ransom” is restricted to approximately eight instances where there is a clear reference to the payment of some sort of price. The translators of the Septuagint restricted their use of this Greek word to those instances where the three Hebrew terms clearly meant ransom payment.<\/p>\n<p>The most important occurrence in the NT is Jesus’ description of his death “as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). Three features stand out in Jesus’ words: his service is one of ransom; his self-sacrifice is the ransom price; and his ransom is substitutionary in character. “He gave his life to purchase freedom for everyone” (1 Tm 2:6). Jesus Christ “gave his life to free us from every kind of sin” (Ti 2:14). The ransom price was “the precious blood of Christ,” who was an unblemished lamb (1 Pt 1:18-19), thus linking Christ’s self-sacrifice to the sacrifices of the OT that pointed to him. The blood of goats and calves was not able to save, but an eternal redemption was obtained by Christ’s blood (Heb 9:12). In heaven the redeemed sing the new song to the Lamb whose blood ransomed them (Rv 5:9; cf. 14:3-4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Redeemer, Redemption.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RANSOM<\/h3>\n<p>Price for redeeming or liberating slaves, captives, property, or life. Jesus described his entire ministry as one of service in giving his life as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). Hence, “ransom” is closely linked to such terms as “redemption” and “salvation,” to the satisfaction Christ made in atonement for sin.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the OT God provided various regulations for his covenant people whereby life and property could be “redeemed,” “bought back,” or “set free” by payment of ransom (cf. Lv 25–27). Ransom involved a price paid as a substitute for that which was redeemed or set free.<\/p>\n<p>The OT uses three different Hebrew words for ransom or redemption. Only when there is a clear indication of the payment of a price are these terms translated by “ransom.” But even when another term, such as “redemption,” is used in English translation, a ransom price is usually implied.<\/p>\n<p>One of the Hebrew terms (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kopher<\/span>) means a “cover” or a “covering.” It was a replacement payment made in exchange for punishment. A ransom could be paid to redeem the life of the owner of an ox that had gored a person to death (Ex 21:30). A half-shekel ransom price was required by God for each Israelite at census taking to prevent a plague (30:12), and this “atonement money” was an offering to the Lord for use in the tabernacle service. A murderer could not be ransomed, and anyone who found safety in a city of refuge could not be taken back by ransom (Nm 35:31-32). It was impossible to avoid death by paying a ransom (Ps 49:7-9). But in a few instances the term takes on the meaning of a “bribe” or “hush money” (1 Sm 12:3; Prv 6:35; Am 5:12).<\/p>\n<p>A second Hebrew word-family for “ransom” and “redemption” is related to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span><em>.<\/em> <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Go’el<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning a “reclaimant” or “redeemer,” derives from the root meaning of the Hebrew term “to restore, repair, deliver, rescue.” The term refers to God’s family-law regulations that place various obligations on a relative or kinsman (Lv 25:25-55). The kinsman had the right and duty of redeeming by ransom any family property that a person was compelled to sell (Lv 25:25-34; Ru 4:4-6); of ransoming a relative who was compelled by poverty to sell himself as a slave to a stranger or sojourner (Lv 25:47-55); and of acting as avenger of the blood of a dead relative, thus enforcing the claim for satisfaction for shedding his blood (Nm 35:19-27; Jos 20:3-5). The kinsman was also obligated to marry the wife of a dead brother who had died without leaving children so that the kinsman might raise up seed and the brother’s name not be forgotten in Israel (Ru 3:9-13; 4:1-12). In a general sense the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> was a “vindicator” or “redeemer”; a familiar example is Job’s cry for God to vindicate him (Jb 19:25). In the highest sense, God is the kinsman and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> of Israel, redeeming them from the bondage of Egypt (Ex 6:5-7), from captivity in Babylon, and from distress in general (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> occurs 13 times in Is 40–46). Thus Israel is called “the ransomed of the Lord” (Is 35:10), having been “redeemed without money” (52:3). In such contexts, however, the cost is indicated in terms of God’s might and power.<\/p>\n<p>The OT uses a third Hebrew word (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">pidyon<\/span>) from the area of commercial law for ransom or payment. Since God spared the firstborn in Israel at the time of Passover, the first offspring of every womb belonged to God, and the oldest male was redeemed by ransom (Ex 13:12-15; 34:20; Lv 27:27; Nm 18:15-17). Later the entire tribe of Levi was set aside as priestly substitutes for the firstborn. Since there were 273 more firstborn than Levites, a payment of five shekels was paid in ransom for each (Nm 3:40-46). This term was also used for the price paid to ransom a slave from slavery (Dt 15:15; 24:18); a slave concubine could also be ransomed (Ex 21:8-11; Lv 19:20). God motivates these provisions by his own ransoming of Israel as slaves in Egypt (Dt 15:15; 24:18). This Hebrew term is also applied to God’s deliverance of Israel from Egypt (Dt 7:8; 9:26; 13:5; 2 Sm 7:23; 1 Chr 17:21; Ps 78:42) and from Babylonian captivity (Is 35:10; 51:11). Sometimes God ransoms without reference to a specific occasion (Hos 7:13; cf. Dt 21:8; Neh 1:10; Is 1:27; Jer 31:11). God also ransoms from the grave (Hos 13:14), from iniquities (Ps 130:8), and from troubles (25:22). This deliverance always implies some sort of payment or cost, such as “the mighty power” or “strong hand” of God needed for the redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT there is just one family of words used for ransom. The term basically means “to loose” or “to set free.” It denotes releasing, redeeming, or liberating on payment of the ransom price. The translation “ransom” is restricted to approximately eight instances where there is a clear reference to the payment of some sort of price. The translators of the Septuagint restricted their use of this Greek word to those instances where the three Hebrew terms clearly meant ransom payment.<\/p>\n<p>The most important occurrence in the NT is Jesus’ description of his death “as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). Three features stand out in Jesus’ words: his service is one of ransom; his self-sacrifice is the ransom price; and his ransom is substitutionary in character. “He gave his life to purchase freedom for everyone” (1 Tm 2:6). Jesus Christ “gave his life to free us from every kind of sin” (Ti 2:14). The ransom price was “the precious blood of Christ,” who was an unblemished lamb (1 Pt 1:18-19), thus linking Christ’s self-sacrifice to the sacrifices of the OT that pointed to him. The blood of goats and calves was not able to save, but an eternal redemption was obtained by Christ’s blood (Heb 9:12). In heaven the redeemed sing the new song to the Lamb whose blood ransomed them (Rv 5:9; cf. 14:3-4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Redeemer, Redemption.<\/p>","summary_ro":"RANSOM Price for redeeming or liberating slaves, captives, property, or life. Jesus described his entire ministry as one of service in giving his life as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). Hence, “ransom” is closely linked to such terms as “redemption” and “salvation,” to the satisfaction Christ made in atonement for sin. In the Old Testament In the OT God provided various regulations for his covenant people whereby life and property could be “redeemed,” “bought back,” or “set free” by p...","summary_en":"RANSOM Price for redeeming or liberating slaves, captives, property, or life. Jesus described his entire ministry as one of service in giving his life as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). Hence, “ransom” is closely linked to such terms as “redemption” and “salvation,” to the satisfaction Christ made in atonement for sin. In the Old Testament In the OT God provided various regulations for his covenant people whereby life and property could be “redeemed,” “bought back,” or “set free” by p...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32547,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Redemption Redeemer","title_en":"Redemption Redeemer","content_ro":"<h3>REDEEMER, REDEMPTION<\/h3>\n<p>English words derived from a Latin root meaning “to buy back,” thus meaning the liberation of any possession, object, or person, usually by payment of a ransom. In Greek the root word means “to loose” and so to free. The term is used of freeing from chains, slavery, or prison.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentandNewTestamentWords\">Old Testament and New Testament Words<\/p>\n<p>For a full understanding of the concept of redemption, it is necessary to look at the OT. There are three different words used in Hebrew, depending on the particular situation, that convey the idea of redemption. The meaning of these redemptive terms rests on legal, social, and religious customs that are foreign to modern culture. An understanding of the culture is needed for an understanding of the terminology and its use.<\/p>\n<p>The first term used for redemption has a legal context. The verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">padah<\/span> is used when an animal substitutes for (or redeems) a person or another animal. The noun derived from the root means the ransom or the the price paid. When a living being, person or animal, requires redemption, the substitution must be made, or price paid; otherwise, the creature involved is killed (Ex 13:13; 34:20). However, there is evidence that this rule was not always strictly followed (Ex 21:8; Jb 6:23).<\/p>\n<p>The concept of redemption had special significance for the firstborn. The firstborn male, both man and beast, belonged to God. In theory the firstborn was sacrificed to him. This was done in the case of many animals, but the human firstborn and some animals were redeemed (Ex 13:13; 34:20; Nm 18:15-16). In the redemption of the firstborn son, an animal was substituted, although later a sum of money was paid (Nm 18:16).<\/p>\n<p>The second term involved is the Hebrew root <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ga’al<\/span><em>,<\/em> which is used primarily in relation to family rules and obligations, the laws governing family property rights and duties. For example, should a piece of property be lost by a family member, the next of kin had both the right and the obligation to redeem this property. This right of redemption protected the family inheritance. The noun derived from this root is equivalent to the English root “redemption,” and the person who buys back the property is the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> or redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>An Israelite who was forced to sell himself into slavery to pay his debts could be redeemed by a near relative or even by himself (Lv 25:47-49). Land might also be redeemed in the same fashion (25:25-28; Jer 32:6-9).<\/p>\n<p>The right of redemption extended also to persons in special circumstances. The obligation of a man to marry his brother’s widow is well known. In the book of Ruth, the right of redemption is extended to a distant relative. In this story, Boaz redeemed not only the property but Ruth as well, and she became his wife (Ru 3:13; 4:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The third term used in Hebrew is the root verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kaphar<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “to cover.” From this root come the terms meaning to cover sin, atone, or expiate. The noun derived, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kopher<\/span><em>,<\/em> means the price paid to cover sin, when the term is used in the religious sense.<\/p>\n<p>The term is used to mean the payment made for any life that should be forfeited. A good illustration is the price paid by the owner of an ox that had gored a person to death. Under the law, the owner’s life was forfeited, but he could redeem himself by paying the required ransom (Ex 21:28-32).<\/p>\n<p>All three terms are translated by the same Greek verb, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">luo<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to loose.” The noun <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">lutron<\/span> (ransom), is used for all three terms on occasion. This indicates that while the Hebrew used different words for different situations, the same essential meaning of redemption was involved in all situations. The concept of redeeming or freeing was of primary concern.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GodasRedeemer\">God as Redeemer<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the object of God’s redemption is generally the people as a whole, or the nation, rather than individuals. The beginning of this concept of national redemption is seen in God’s freeing the people from slavery in Egypt. Though they were in bondage, their God ransomed them (Ex 6:6; Dt 15:15).<\/p>\n<p>As indicated by the terms used for redeeming or ransoming, the payment of a set price or the substitution of another life was involved. When the redemptive concept is applied to God as the subject, he delivers—without the payment of a price—by his might or power: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, and I will free you from your slavery in Egypt. I will redeem you with mighty power and great acts of judgment” (Ex 6:6, <span>nlt<\/span>; cf. Dt 15:15). The same thought is carried forward in other times of need and deliverance, such as the time of exile. God is the national deliverer (e.g., Is 29:22; 35:10; 43:1; 44:22; Jer 31:11).<\/p>\n<p>Again there is no suggestion that God paid a price to free his people. God redeems by his own power. “For this is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says: ‘When I sold you into exile, I received no payment. Now I can redeem you without paying for you’ ” (Is 52:3, <span>nlt<\/span>). When Cyrus let the people free, it was again without payment of a price (45:13).<\/p>\n<p>In the Christian community, especially in the early centuries of the church, there arose the idea that a ransom price was needed to pay for sins. In fact, it was often taught that the sinner was, in effect, held captive by Satan. Christ’s death was the ransom price paid by God to Satan to free sinful people. This teaching is not supported by Scripture. The death of Christ is an atonement or expiation made for sin, but this does not mean that his death was a price paid to Satan. God is not pictured anywhere in Scripture as getting into such a commercial transaction with Satan. The redeeming work of the cross must always lie within the realm of divine mystery.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RedemptionandtheMessiah\">Redemption and the Messiah<\/p>\n<p>In the OT redemption is closely linked with the messianic hope. From the time of the exodus on, God is revealed as deliverer. The hope of redemption is very strong during the Captivity. The prophets constantly speak of God as redeemer or deliverer. This hope was to be fulfilled ultimately through God’s anointed one, or Messiah, who would be of the line of David (Is 9:1-6; 11:1-9; Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>The messianic hope grew stronger during the periods of exile and persecution. In fact, during the long centuries of persecution, this hope of a messianic deliverer was stronger than ever. This period, generally called the intertestamental period, lasted about four centuries and extended from the last of the prophets until the time of John the Baptist and Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Christians believe that in Jesus the Christ (or Jesus the Messiah) we see the fulfillment of the OT redemptive concept. The redemptive image is very evident in the Gospels. John the Baptist depicted Jesus of Nazareth as the fulfillment of God’s redemptive kingdom (Mt 3:12) and hence, the Messiah of Israel. Jesus, the Son of Man, came to give himself as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). The work of the Messiah was vicarious and substitutionary.<\/p>\n<p>The same thought occurs especially in the writings of Paul. Christ is the sin offering to the Father (Rom 3:25). Redemption is by the giving of his life (Acts 20:28) for a purchased people (1 Pt 2:9; see also 1 Cor 7:22-24; 2 Cor 5:14-17). These are all words or expressions used to present the central idea of redemption or atonement. Jesus Christ is the one who in himself fulfilled the redemption concept of Scripture and by his sacrifice provided for the redemption of sinners.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of redemption has deep meaning for God’s people. In the OT it illustrates the truth that God is the Savior of his covenant people. Although Israel fell into sin by denying God’s law, God did not destroy them but restored them to favor upon repentance.<\/p>\n<p>In the prophets, especially, God’s redemptive work was to be completed through the Messiah and his redemptive sacrifice. The followers of Jesus believed that he was the Messiah who would provide redemption for the whole world. Coupled with the idea of redemption is the motivating force of divine love as the basis for restoration (Jn 3:16). The one who believes will be freed from the bondage of sin and find favor again with his redeeming God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Ransom; Salvation.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>REDEEMER, REDEMPTION<\/h3>\n<p>English words derived from a Latin root meaning “to buy back,” thus meaning the liberation of any possession, object, or person, usually by payment of a ransom. In Greek the root word means “to loose” and so to free. The term is used of freeing from chains, slavery, or prison.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentandNewTestamentWords\">Old Testament and New Testament Words<\/p>\n<p>For a full understanding of the concept of redemption, it is necessary to look at the OT. There are three different words used in Hebrew, depending on the particular situation, that convey the idea of redemption. The meaning of these redemptive terms rests on legal, social, and religious customs that are foreign to modern culture. An understanding of the culture is needed for an understanding of the terminology and its use.<\/p>\n<p>The first term used for redemption has a legal context. The verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">padah<\/span> is used when an animal substitutes for (or redeems) a person or another animal. The noun derived from the root means the ransom or the the price paid. When a living being, person or animal, requires redemption, the substitution must be made, or price paid; otherwise, the creature involved is killed (Ex 13:13; 34:20). However, there is evidence that this rule was not always strictly followed (Ex 21:8; Jb 6:23).<\/p>\n<p>The concept of redemption had special significance for the firstborn. The firstborn male, both man and beast, belonged to God. In theory the firstborn was sacrificed to him. This was done in the case of many animals, but the human firstborn and some animals were redeemed (Ex 13:13; 34:20; Nm 18:15-16). In the redemption of the firstborn son, an animal was substituted, although later a sum of money was paid (Nm 18:16).<\/p>\n<p>The second term involved is the Hebrew root <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ga’al<\/span><em>,<\/em> which is used primarily in relation to family rules and obligations, the laws governing family property rights and duties. For example, should a piece of property be lost by a family member, the next of kin had both the right and the obligation to redeem this property. This right of redemption protected the family inheritance. The noun derived from this root is equivalent to the English root “redemption,” and the person who buys back the property is the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> or redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>An Israelite who was forced to sell himself into slavery to pay his debts could be redeemed by a near relative or even by himself (Lv 25:47-49). Land might also be redeemed in the same fashion (25:25-28; Jer 32:6-9).<\/p>\n<p>The right of redemption extended also to persons in special circumstances. The obligation of a man to marry his brother’s widow is well known. In the book of Ruth, the right of redemption is extended to a distant relative. In this story, Boaz redeemed not only the property but Ruth as well, and she became his wife (Ru 3:13; 4:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The third term used in Hebrew is the root verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kaphar<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “to cover.” From this root come the terms meaning to cover sin, atone, or expiate. The noun derived, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kopher<\/span><em>,<\/em> means the price paid to cover sin, when the term is used in the religious sense.<\/p>\n<p>The term is used to mean the payment made for any life that should be forfeited. A good illustration is the price paid by the owner of an ox that had gored a person to death. Under the law, the owner’s life was forfeited, but he could redeem himself by paying the required ransom (Ex 21:28-32).<\/p>\n<p>All three terms are translated by the same Greek verb, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">luo<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to loose.” The noun <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">lutron<\/span> (ransom), is used for all three terms on occasion. This indicates that while the Hebrew used different words for different situations, the same essential meaning of redemption was involved in all situations. The concept of redeeming or freeing was of primary concern.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GodasRedeemer\">God as Redeemer<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the object of God’s redemption is generally the people as a whole, or the nation, rather than individuals. The beginning of this concept of national redemption is seen in God’s freeing the people from slavery in Egypt. Though they were in bondage, their God ransomed them (Ex 6:6; Dt 15:15).<\/p>\n<p>As indicated by the terms used for redeeming or ransoming, the payment of a set price or the substitution of another life was involved. When the redemptive concept is applied to God as the subject, he delivers—without the payment of a price—by his might or power: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, and I will free you from your slavery in Egypt. I will redeem you with mighty power and great acts of judgment” (Ex 6:6, <span>nlt<\/span>; cf. Dt 15:15). The same thought is carried forward in other times of need and deliverance, such as the time of exile. God is the national deliverer (e.g., Is 29:22; 35:10; 43:1; 44:22; Jer 31:11).<\/p>\n<p>Again there is no suggestion that God paid a price to free his people. God redeems by his own power. “For this is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says: ‘When I sold you into exile, I received no payment. Now I can redeem you without paying for you’ ” (Is 52:3, <span>nlt<\/span>). When Cyrus let the people free, it was again without payment of a price (45:13).<\/p>\n<p>In the Christian community, especially in the early centuries of the church, there arose the idea that a ransom price was needed to pay for sins. In fact, it was often taught that the sinner was, in effect, held captive by Satan. Christ’s death was the ransom price paid by God to Satan to free sinful people. This teaching is not supported by Scripture. The death of Christ is an atonement or expiation made for sin, but this does not mean that his death was a price paid to Satan. God is not pictured anywhere in Scripture as getting into such a commercial transaction with Satan. The redeeming work of the cross must always lie within the realm of divine mystery.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RedemptionandtheMessiah\">Redemption and the Messiah<\/p>\n<p>In the OT redemption is closely linked with the messianic hope. From the time of the exodus on, God is revealed as deliverer. The hope of redemption is very strong during the Captivity. The prophets constantly speak of God as redeemer or deliverer. This hope was to be fulfilled ultimately through God’s anointed one, or Messiah, who would be of the line of David (Is 9:1-6; 11:1-9; Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>The messianic hope grew stronger during the periods of exile and persecution. In fact, during the long centuries of persecution, this hope of a messianic deliverer was stronger than ever. This period, generally called the intertestamental period, lasted about four centuries and extended from the last of the prophets until the time of John the Baptist and Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Christians believe that in Jesus the Christ (or Jesus the Messiah) we see the fulfillment of the OT redemptive concept. The redemptive image is very evident in the Gospels. John the Baptist depicted Jesus of Nazareth as the fulfillment of God’s redemptive kingdom (Mt 3:12) and hence, the Messiah of Israel. Jesus, the Son of Man, came to give himself as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). The work of the Messiah was vicarious and substitutionary.<\/p>\n<p>The same thought occurs especially in the writings of Paul. Christ is the sin offering to the Father (Rom 3:25). Redemption is by the giving of his life (Acts 20:28) for a purchased people (1 Pt 2:9; see also 1 Cor 7:22-24; 2 Cor 5:14-17). These are all words or expressions used to present the central idea of redemption or atonement. Jesus Christ is the one who in himself fulfilled the redemption concept of Scripture and by his sacrifice provided for the redemption of sinners.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of redemption has deep meaning for God’s people. In the OT it illustrates the truth that God is the Savior of his covenant people. Although Israel fell into sin by denying God’s law, God did not destroy them but restored them to favor upon repentance.<\/p>\n<p>In the prophets, especially, God’s redemptive work was to be completed through the Messiah and his redemptive sacrifice. The followers of Jesus believed that he was the Messiah who would provide redemption for the whole world. Coupled with the idea of redemption is the motivating force of divine love as the basis for restoration (Jn 3:16). The one who believes will be freed from the bondage of sin and find favor again with his redeeming God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Ransom; Salvation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"REDEEMER, REDEMPTION English words derived from a Latin root meaning “to buy back,” thus meaning the liberation of any possession, object, or person, usually by payment of a ransom. In Greek the root word means “to loose” and so to free. The term is used of freeing from chains, slavery, or prison. Old Testament and New Testament Words For a full understanding of the concept of redemption, it is necessary to look at the OT. There are three different words used in Hebrew, depending on the parti...","summary_en":"REDEEMER, REDEMPTION English words derived from a Latin root meaning “to buy back,” thus meaning the liberation of any possession, object, or person, usually by payment of a ransom. In Greek the root word means “to loose” and so to free. The term is used of freeing from chains, slavery, or prison. Old Testament and New Testament Words For a full understanding of the concept of redemption, it is necessary to look at the OT. There are three different words used in Hebrew, depending on the parti...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33390,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Ruth","title_en":"Book of Ruth","content_ro":"<h3>RUTH, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p>• Message<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>The author of the book is unknown. The question of authorship has particular connection with the date of writing, and a few clues provide at least an educated guess. The book must have been written sometime after the beginning of David’s reign. The information in Ruth 4:18-22, which pertains to the historical significance of Ruth as David’s great-grandmother, bears this out. Since foreign marriages were not approved in the book of Ruth, it scarcely could have been written during the period in which Solomon began his policy of foreign marriages. Also, David’s close friendship with Moab might have prompted someone in his kingdom to write the book, thus presenting objective rationale for David’s actions (see 1 Sm 22:3-5). Consequently, the author may have been someone close to David, possibly Samuel, Nathan, or Abiathar.<\/p>\n<p>The time of the narrative is indicated by the opening statement: “In the days when the judges ruled. . . .” The dates of the judges probably comprise a period of about 300 years, beginning with the judgeship of Othniel and concluding with that of Samson, though Samuel also served as a judge. If the genealogical information is complete in Ruth 4:18-22, the events took place during the life of David’s great-grandfather and mark the birth of his grandfather. Allowing a 35-year generation span, the events would have taken place somewhere about the turn of the 11th century <span>BC<\/span>, or about 100 years before David’s birth.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The book’s purpose is closely related to its date of composition. Assuming an early date, that is, one close to David’s lifetime, its principal thrust must be the authentication of the Davidic line. The book may be considered as a justification for including the godly Moabitess in the nation of Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Introduction (1:1-5)<\/h5>\n<p>Driven by famine, Elimelech, with his wife, Naomi, and his two sons, Mahlon and Chilion, cross the Jordan to stay for a period of time in Moab, where there is sufficient provision. The two sons, after marrying Moabite women, die, and their father dies as well. Naomi is left a widow, with two foreign daughters-in-law.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Return to Bethlehem (1:6-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Hearing reports from Bethlehem that the famine has ended, Naomi makes preparations to return. Both of her daughters-in-law, Orpah and Ruth, accompany her for at least a portion of the journey. Probably thinking of the problems they might encounter as foreigners in Judah, Naomi strongly urges the girls to stay in their own land. Both of the young widows refuse, but Naomi presents the facts. First, she is not pregnant, so the chance of a younger brother fulfilling the levirate responsibility is not imminent. Second, she has no prospects of remarriage and consequently no prospect of further children. Then she also notes that even if the first two conditions were met immediately, the possibility of their waiting was impossible. Orpah is persuaded and kisses her mother-in-law good-bye.<\/p>\n<p>But Ruth “clung to her” (1:18). The verb, having the connotation of being glued to something, is the same verb used of marriage (Gn 2:24). Ruth demonstrated her serious intentions by making five commitments (Ru 1:16-17). In essence, Ruth renounced her former life in order to gain a life that she considered of greater value. She decided to follow the God of Israel and his laws. Ruth’s appeal to the God of Israel was more than equal to Naomi’s pleas, and the two of them returned together.<\/p>\n<p>Their arrival in Bethlehem was traumatic for Naomi. Having left Bethlehem with a husband and two sons, she returned empty. She told her friends to call her “Mara” (bitter). But she had returned at a propitious time, the beginning of the harvest season.<\/p>\n<h5>Reaping in the Fields of Boaz (2:1-23)<\/h5>\n<p>The first verse of the chapter provides the setting for the narrative that follows by introducing Boaz, a wealthy relative of Elimelech.<\/p>\n<p>In the second verse, Ruth volunteered to glean the fields by following the reapers and picking up the small amounts left behind. Gleaners were also permitted to harvest the grain in the corners of the fields—a provision for the poor contained in the law (Lv 19:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Ruth happened to come to the field of Boaz. When he visited this field, he noticed Ruth, inquired about her, and learned her identity. His overseer reported that she had industriously worked the fields from early morning until that time. Boaz, attracted to her because of her loyalty and concern for Naomi, graciously made additional provisions for her. She was given a favored position in reaping, directly behind the main body of reapers. Further, she was to receive water that had been drawn for her by the young men—an unorthodox arrangement.<\/p>\n<p>Ruth, falling before Boaz in a gesture of great humility and respect, asked why she—as a foreigner—should receive such favor. Boaz gave two reasons: her kindness to her mother-in-law, and her spiritual insight, which led her to seek after Israel’s God, “under whose wings you have come to take refuge” (Ru 2:12, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>She was also given a place at the reapers’ table and, upon Boaz’s orders, returned to the fields, this time to reap from the unharvested grain. At the end of the day she returned home to Naomi and told her of the day’s events. Naomi informed Ruth that Boaz had the right of redemption (see discussion below). Ruth returned to his fields until the end of the harvest season.<\/p>\n<h5>Relying upon the Kinsman (3:1-18)<\/h5>\n<p>Naomi advised Ruth to approach Boaz as a <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span><em>,<\/em> or kinsman-redeemer. The plan suggested by Naomi seems peculiar, yet some thoughts may give a certain coloring to it. (1) Naomi seems to have believed that Boaz was the nearest kinsman, being ignorant of the yet nearer one (3:12). Consequently, according to Israelite law (Dt 25:5ff.), it would be the duty of Boaz to marry Ruth to produce offspring, since her husband died. (2) The general presentation of Naomi’s character in this book is that of a God-fearing woman. It is certain that, however curious in its external form, there can be nothing counseled here that is repugnant to God’s law or shocking to a virtuous man such as Boaz. Otherwise, Naomi would have been frustrating her own purpose.<\/p>\n<p>Boaz’s response to Ruth’s actions demonstrated his gentlemanly concerns for her. He explained to her that he was not the nearest kinsman but promised that he would take care of the necessary procedures the next day. Protecting her reputation, Boaz sent her home before daylight. Naomi predicted that Boaz would settle the matter that very day.<\/p>\n<h5>Redeeming the Inheritance (4:1-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Boaz went to the place of business, the city gate. The city gate area comprised the forum where the public affairs of the city were discussed. Boaz indicated that he wished to discuss a matter of business with the nearer kinsman. Ten of the city elders acted as witnesses. The first matter at hand was to deal with the issue of property. Boaz asked this nearer kinsman if he was willing to acquire property for Naomi. This is stated in the traditional stipulation: “Your purchase of the land from Naomi also requires that you marry Ruth, the Moabite widow” (4:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). The nearer kinsman was unwilling to marry Ruth because this would inevitably cost him some financial loss, since he would have to divide his own property with any son of his born to Ruth. Thus he relinquished his rights by the custom of taking off his shoe. (The shoe was symbolic of the land rights that belonged to the inheritance.) So Boaz took the part of being the kinsman-redeemer. The marriage of Boaz and Ruth produced a son who, under Israel’s laws, was reckoned as Naomi’s child and heir.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Message\">Message<\/p>\n<p>First, the book of Ruth traces the lineage of Ruth to David. The completion of that line is in Matthew 1 and finds its fulfillment in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A second teaching is the beauty of God’s grace. A foreigner, even a Moabitess, can be linked with Israel’s blessing.<\/p>\n<p>Theologically, the concept of kinsman-redeemer as a type of Messiah is clearly evident. He must be a blood relative, have the ability to purchase, be willing to buy the inheritance, and be willing to marry the widow of the deceased kinsman.<\/p>\n<p>And finally, the love that Ruth showed to Naomi provides a pattern of devotion. The women of Bethlehem told Naomi, “Your daughter-in-law . . . loves you so much and [is] better to you than seven sons!” (4:15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RUTH, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p>• Message<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>The author of the book is unknown. The question of authorship has particular connection with the date of writing, and a few clues provide at least an educated guess. The book must have been written sometime after the beginning of David’s reign. The information in Ruth 4:18-22, which pertains to the historical significance of Ruth as David’s great-grandmother, bears this out. Since foreign marriages were not approved in the book of Ruth, it scarcely could have been written during the period in which Solomon began his policy of foreign marriages. Also, David’s close friendship with Moab might have prompted someone in his kingdom to write the book, thus presenting objective rationale for David’s actions (see 1 Sm 22:3-5). Consequently, the author may have been someone close to David, possibly Samuel, Nathan, or Abiathar.<\/p>\n<p>The time of the narrative is indicated by the opening statement: “In the days when the judges ruled. . . .” The dates of the judges probably comprise a period of about 300 years, beginning with the judgeship of Othniel and concluding with that of Samson, though Samuel also served as a judge. If the genealogical information is complete in Ruth 4:18-22, the events took place during the life of David’s great-grandfather and mark the birth of his grandfather. Allowing a 35-year generation span, the events would have taken place somewhere about the turn of the 11th century <span>BC<\/span>, or about 100 years before David’s birth.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The book’s purpose is closely related to its date of composition. Assuming an early date, that is, one close to David’s lifetime, its principal thrust must be the authentication of the Davidic line. The book may be considered as a justification for including the godly Moabitess in the nation of Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Introduction (1:1-5)<\/h5>\n<p>Driven by famine, Elimelech, with his wife, Naomi, and his two sons, Mahlon and Chilion, cross the Jordan to stay for a period of time in Moab, where there is sufficient provision. The two sons, after marrying Moabite women, die, and their father dies as well. Naomi is left a widow, with two foreign daughters-in-law.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Return to Bethlehem (1:6-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Hearing reports from Bethlehem that the famine has ended, Naomi makes preparations to return. Both of her daughters-in-law, Orpah and Ruth, accompany her for at least a portion of the journey. Probably thinking of the problems they might encounter as foreigners in Judah, Naomi strongly urges the girls to stay in their own land. Both of the young widows refuse, but Naomi presents the facts. First, she is not pregnant, so the chance of a younger brother fulfilling the levirate responsibility is not imminent. Second, she has no prospects of remarriage and consequently no prospect of further children. Then she also notes that even if the first two conditions were met immediately, the possibility of their waiting was impossible. Orpah is persuaded and kisses her mother-in-law good-bye.<\/p>\n<p>But Ruth “clung to her” (1:18). The verb, having the connotation of being glued to something, is the same verb used of marriage (Gn 2:24). Ruth demonstrated her serious intentions by making five commitments (Ru 1:16-17). In essence, Ruth renounced her former life in order to gain a life that she considered of greater value. She decided to follow the God of Israel and his laws. Ruth’s appeal to the God of Israel was more than equal to Naomi’s pleas, and the two of them returned together.<\/p>\n<p>Their arrival in Bethlehem was traumatic for Naomi. Having left Bethlehem with a husband and two sons, she returned empty. She told her friends to call her “Mara” (bitter). But she had returned at a propitious time, the beginning of the harvest season.<\/p>\n<h5>Reaping in the Fields of Boaz (2:1-23)<\/h5>\n<p>The first verse of the chapter provides the setting for the narrative that follows by introducing Boaz, a wealthy relative of Elimelech.<\/p>\n<p>In the second verse, Ruth volunteered to glean the fields by following the reapers and picking up the small amounts left behind. Gleaners were also permitted to harvest the grain in the corners of the fields—a provision for the poor contained in the law (Lv 19:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Ruth happened to come to the field of Boaz. When he visited this field, he noticed Ruth, inquired about her, and learned her identity. His overseer reported that she had industriously worked the fields from early morning until that time. Boaz, attracted to her because of her loyalty and concern for Naomi, graciously made additional provisions for her. She was given a favored position in reaping, directly behind the main body of reapers. Further, she was to receive water that had been drawn for her by the young men—an unorthodox arrangement.<\/p>\n<p>Ruth, falling before Boaz in a gesture of great humility and respect, asked why she—as a foreigner—should receive such favor. Boaz gave two reasons: her kindness to her mother-in-law, and her spiritual insight, which led her to seek after Israel’s God, “under whose wings you have come to take refuge” (Ru 2:12, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>She was also given a place at the reapers’ table and, upon Boaz’s orders, returned to the fields, this time to reap from the unharvested grain. At the end of the day she returned home to Naomi and told her of the day’s events. Naomi informed Ruth that Boaz had the right of redemption (see discussion below). Ruth returned to his fields until the end of the harvest season.<\/p>\n<h5>Relying upon the Kinsman (3:1-18)<\/h5>\n<p>Naomi advised Ruth to approach Boaz as a <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span><em>,<\/em> or kinsman-redeemer. The plan suggested by Naomi seems peculiar, yet some thoughts may give a certain coloring to it. (1) Naomi seems to have believed that Boaz was the nearest kinsman, being ignorant of the yet nearer one (3:12). Consequently, according to Israelite law (Dt 25:5ff.), it would be the duty of Boaz to marry Ruth to produce offspring, since her husband died. (2) The general presentation of Naomi’s character in this book is that of a God-fearing woman. It is certain that, however curious in its external form, there can be nothing counseled here that is repugnant to God’s law or shocking to a virtuous man such as Boaz. Otherwise, Naomi would have been frustrating her own purpose.<\/p>\n<p>Boaz’s response to Ruth’s actions demonstrated his gentlemanly concerns for her. He explained to her that he was not the nearest kinsman but promised that he would take care of the necessary procedures the next day. Protecting her reputation, Boaz sent her home before daylight. Naomi predicted that Boaz would settle the matter that very day.<\/p>\n<h5>Redeeming the Inheritance (4:1-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Boaz went to the place of business, the city gate. The city gate area comprised the forum where the public affairs of the city were discussed. Boaz indicated that he wished to discuss a matter of business with the nearer kinsman. Ten of the city elders acted as witnesses. The first matter at hand was to deal with the issue of property. Boaz asked this nearer kinsman if he was willing to acquire property for Naomi. This is stated in the traditional stipulation: “Your purchase of the land from Naomi also requires that you marry Ruth, the Moabite widow” (4:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). The nearer kinsman was unwilling to marry Ruth because this would inevitably cost him some financial loss, since he would have to divide his own property with any son of his born to Ruth. Thus he relinquished his rights by the custom of taking off his shoe. (The shoe was symbolic of the land rights that belonged to the inheritance.) So Boaz took the part of being the kinsman-redeemer. The marriage of Boaz and Ruth produced a son who, under Israel’s laws, was reckoned as Naomi’s child and heir.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Message\">Message<\/p>\n<p>First, the book of Ruth traces the lineage of Ruth to David. The completion of that line is in Matthew 1 and finds its fulfillment in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A second teaching is the beauty of God’s grace. A foreigner, even a Moabitess, can be linked with Israel’s blessing.<\/p>\n<p>Theologically, the concept of kinsman-redeemer as a type of Messiah is clearly evident. He must be a blood relative, have the ability to purchase, be willing to buy the inheritance, and be willing to marry the widow of the deceased kinsman.<\/p>\n<p>And finally, the love that Ruth showed to Naomi provides a pattern of devotion. The women of Bethlehem told Naomi, “Your daughter-in-law . . . loves you so much and [is] better to you than seven sons!” (4:15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"RUTH, Book of Preview • Author and Date • Purpose • Content • Message Author and Date The author of the book is unknown. The question of authorship has particular connection with the date of writing, and a few clues provide at least an educated guess. The book must have been written sometime after the beginning of David’s reign. The information in Ruth 4:18-22, which pertains to the historical significance of Ruth as David’s great-grandmother, bears this out. Since foreign marriages were not ...","summary_en":"RUTH, Book of Preview • Author and Date • Purpose • Content • Message Author and Date The author of the book is unknown. The question of authorship has particular connection with the date of writing, and a few clues provide at least an educated guess. The book must have been written sometime after the beginning of David’s reign. The information in Ruth 4:18-22, which pertains to the historical significance of Ruth as David’s great-grandmother, bears this out. Since foreign marriages were not ...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":46017,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:1","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:1<\/strong> Most legal transactions, including property transfers, were carried out at <em>the town gate<\/em>. • <em>friend:<\/em> Boaz might or might not have used the man’s name, but the author of Ruth avoided doing so.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:1<\/strong> Most legal transactions, including property transfers, were carried out at <em>the town gate<\/em>. • <em>friend:<\/em> Boaz might or might not have used the man’s name, but the author of Ruth avoided doing so.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:1 Most legal transactions, including property transfers, were carried out at the town gate. • friend: Boaz might or might not have used the man’s name, but the author of Ruth avoided doing so.","summary_en":"4:1 Most legal transactions, including property transfers, were carried out at the town gate. • friend: Boaz might or might not have used the man’s name, but the author of Ruth avoided doing so.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73643,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:1","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:1<\/strong> Most legal transactions, including property transfers, were carried out at <em>the town gate<\/em>. • <em>friend:<\/em> Boaz might or might not have used the man’s name, but the author of Ruth avoided doing so.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:1<\/strong> Most legal transactions, including property transfers, were carried out at <em>the town gate<\/em>. • <em>friend:<\/em> Boaz might or might not have used the man’s name, but the author of Ruth avoided doing so.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:1 Most legal transactions, including property transfers, were carried out at the town gate. • friend: Boaz might or might not have used the man’s name, but the author of Ruth avoided doing so.","summary_en":"4:1 Most legal transactions, including property transfers, were carried out at the town gate. • friend: Boaz might or might not have used the man’s name, but the author of Ruth avoided doing so.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101269,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:1","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:1<\/strong> Most legal transactions, including property transfers, were carried out at <em>the town gate<\/em>. • <em>friend:<\/em> Boaz might or might not have used the man’s name, but the author of Ruth avoided doing so.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:1<\/strong> Most legal transactions, including property transfers, were carried out at <em>the town gate<\/em>. • <em>friend:<\/em> Boaz might or might not have used the man’s name, but the author of Ruth avoided doing so.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:1 Most legal transactions, including property transfers, were carried out at the town gate. • friend: Boaz might or might not have used the man’s name, but the author of Ruth avoided doing so.","summary_en":"4:1 Most legal transactions, including property transfers, were carried out at the town gate. • friend: Boaz might or might not have used the man’s name, but the author of Ruth avoided doing so.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128895,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:1","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:1<\/strong> Most legal transactions, including property transfers, were carried out at <em>the town gate<\/em>. • <em>friend:<\/em> Boaz might or might not have used the man’s name, but the author of Ruth avoided doing so.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:1<\/strong> Most legal transactions, including property transfers, were carried out at <em>the town gate<\/em>. • <em>friend:<\/em> Boaz might or might not have used the man’s name, but the author of Ruth avoided doing so.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:1 Most legal transactions, including property transfers, were carried out at the town gate. • friend: Boaz might or might not have used the man’s name, but the author of Ruth avoided doing so.","summary_en":"4:1 Most legal transactions, including property transfers, were carried out at the town gate. • friend: Boaz might or might not have used the man’s name, but the author of Ruth avoided doing so.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61071,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Family Redeemer","title_en":"The Family Redeemer","content_ro":"<h3>The Family Redeemer<\/h3>\n<p>The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24).<\/p>\n<p>According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel:<\/p>\n<p>1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a family member was to pay off the debt so the land would remain in the family. If no relative could purchase the land and the seller was unable to buy it back, the land still reverted to the seller or his heirs in the Jubilee (fiftieth) Year. Two examples of family redeemers buying land for their relatives are Boaz (Ruth 4:1-12) and Jeremiah (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>2. Similarly, if an Israelite became so poor he had to sell himself into debt-slavery, a family redeemer was to buy his relative from service to a non-relative (Lev 25:35-55). The poor Israelite would pay off his debt by working for his relative, who could be expected to treat him better than a stranger would.<\/p>\n<p>3. The family redeemer was to pursue justice for an Israelite killed by another’s hand, under conditions described in Num 35:9-34.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of the family redeemer reminds us that God is the true owner of all things, and he commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:18; Matt 22:39-40). The New Testament presents Jesus as the perfect family redeemer, buying us from the slavery to sin and death into which we had sold ourselves (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9; cp. Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 130:8; Isa 44:22; 59:20; 63:9; Jer 31:11). In the spirit of the Old Testament family redeemer (such as Boaz) and following the example of our great Redeemer, we, too, are commanded to act with love and compassion toward others (Lev 19:11-18; Matt 5:43-48; 19:19; 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 25:23-55; Num 35:9-34; Ruth 2:20; 3:9, 12; 4:1-10; Isa 59:20; Jer 32:6-15; Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Family Redeemer<\/h3>\n<p>The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24).<\/p>\n<p>According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel:<\/p>\n<p>1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a family member was to pay off the debt so the land would remain in the family. If no relative could purchase the land and the seller was unable to buy it back, the land still reverted to the seller or his heirs in the Jubilee (fiftieth) Year. Two examples of family redeemers buying land for their relatives are Boaz (Ruth 4:1-12) and Jeremiah (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>2. Similarly, if an Israelite became so poor he had to sell himself into debt-slavery, a family redeemer was to buy his relative from service to a non-relative (Lev 25:35-55). The poor Israelite would pay off his debt by working for his relative, who could be expected to treat him better than a stranger would.<\/p>\n<p>3. The family redeemer was to pursue justice for an Israelite killed by another’s hand, under conditions described in Num 35:9-34.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of the family redeemer reminds us that God is the true owner of all things, and he commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:18; Matt 22:39-40). The New Testament presents Jesus as the perfect family redeemer, buying us from the slavery to sin and death into which we had sold ourselves (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9; cp. Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 130:8; Isa 44:22; 59:20; 63:9; Jer 31:11). In the spirit of the Old Testament family redeemer (such as Boaz) and following the example of our great Redeemer, we, too, are commanded to act with love and compassion toward others (Lev 19:11-18; Matt 5:43-48; 19:19; 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 25:23-55; Num 35:9-34; Ruth 2:20; 3:9, 12; 4:1-10; Isa 59:20; Jer 32:6-15; Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Family Redeemer The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24). According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel: 1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a fam...","summary_en":"The Family Redeemer The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24). According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel: 1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a fam...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":62120,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Intermarriage and Divorce","title_en":"Intermarriage and Divorce","content_ro":"<h3>Intermarriage and Divorce<\/h3>\n<p>God had warned his people not to intermarry with unbelieving foreigners (Deut 7:1-6). The sin was not that they married people from another country or race but that they married people committed to other gods. Moses had married a Cushite woman (Num 12:1), and other foreigners had joined Israel through marriage, notably Rahab the Canaanite (see Matt 1:5) and Ruth the Moabite (Ruth 4:1-22). These women embraced faith in the Lord, and they were blessed. On the other hand, Solomon had taken many foreign wives, and their devotion to other gods led him into idolatry, just as the Lord had warned (1 Kgs 11:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The marriage covenant is sacred, but it was even more important for Israel to remain faithful to the Lord’s covenant with them as a people. Mixed marriages would produce children who were not fully committed to Israel’s faith, having been influenced by their foreign parent’s idolatrous beliefs. This compromise would lead Israel back to where they were before the Exile—to wholesale unfaithfulness to God and a wholehearted embrace of false religions (see Judg 3:3-7; 14:1-9; 1 Kgs 11:1-8; 2 Kgs 17:7-17).<\/p>\n<p>In Ezra 9 and 10, the Jews who had returned from exile had married people who served other gods. Ezra’s solution (divorce) is not prescriptive for believers today. In the new covenant under Christ, the faith of a believer sanctifies his or her marriage and children, so marriage to an unbeliever does not threaten the identity or purity of the community of God’s people (1 Cor 7:14-16). The apostle Paul realized that divorce might occur when believers and unbelievers married, but he did not encourage believers in that situation to seek a divorce (1 Cor 7:10-13). Certainly, the wise policy to avoid these problems is to heed Paul’s advice not to marry an unbeliever in the first place. God’s people need to remain separated from what is unholy: “How can righteousness be a partner with wickedness? How can light live with darkness? What harmony can there be between Christ and the devil? How can a believer be a partner with an unbeliever?” (2 Cor 6:14-15). But those who are married to an unbeliever today have God’s assurance that he can use that difficult situation for his glory (see also 1 Pet 3:1-2).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 7:1-6; Josh 2:1-14; 6:23-25; Judg 3:3-7; 14:1-9; Ruth 4:1-22; 1 Kgs 11:1-8; 2 Kgs 17:7-17; Ezra 9:1–10:44; 1 Cor 7:10-16; 2 Cor 6:14-15; Heb 11:31<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Intermarriage and Divorce<\/h3>\n<p>God had warned his people not to intermarry with unbelieving foreigners (Deut 7:1-6). The sin was not that they married people from another country or race but that they married people committed to other gods. Moses had married a Cushite woman (Num 12:1), and other foreigners had joined Israel through marriage, notably Rahab the Canaanite (see Matt 1:5) and Ruth the Moabite (Ruth 4:1-22). These women embraced faith in the Lord, and they were blessed. On the other hand, Solomon had taken many foreign wives, and their devotion to other gods led him into idolatry, just as the Lord had warned (1 Kgs 11:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The marriage covenant is sacred, but it was even more important for Israel to remain faithful to the Lord’s covenant with them as a people. Mixed marriages would produce children who were not fully committed to Israel’s faith, having been influenced by their foreign parent’s idolatrous beliefs. This compromise would lead Israel back to where they were before the Exile—to wholesale unfaithfulness to God and a wholehearted embrace of false religions (see Judg 3:3-7; 14:1-9; 1 Kgs 11:1-8; 2 Kgs 17:7-17).<\/p>\n<p>In Ezra 9 and 10, the Jews who had returned from exile had married people who served other gods. Ezra’s solution (divorce) is not prescriptive for believers today. In the new covenant under Christ, the faith of a believer sanctifies his or her marriage and children, so marriage to an unbeliever does not threaten the identity or purity of the community of God’s people (1 Cor 7:14-16). The apostle Paul realized that divorce might occur when believers and unbelievers married, but he did not encourage believers in that situation to seek a divorce (1 Cor 7:10-13). Certainly, the wise policy to avoid these problems is to heed Paul’s advice not to marry an unbeliever in the first place. God’s people need to remain separated from what is unholy: “How can righteousness be a partner with wickedness? How can light live with darkness? What harmony can there be between Christ and the devil? How can a believer be a partner with an unbeliever?” (2 Cor 6:14-15). But those who are married to an unbeliever today have God’s assurance that he can use that difficult situation for his glory (see also 1 Pet 3:1-2).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 7:1-6; Josh 2:1-14; 6:23-25; Judg 3:3-7; 14:1-9; Ruth 4:1-22; 1 Kgs 11:1-8; 2 Kgs 17:7-17; Ezra 9:1–10:44; 1 Cor 7:10-16; 2 Cor 6:14-15; Heb 11:31<\/p>","summary_ro":"Intermarriage and Divorce God had warned his people not to intermarry with unbelieving foreigners (Deut 7:1-6). The sin was not that they married people from another country or race but that they married people committed to other gods. Moses had married a Cushite woman (Num 12:1), and other foreigners had joined Israel through marriage, notably Rahab the Canaanite (see Matt 1:5) and Ruth the Moabite (Ruth 4:1-22). These women embraced faith in the Lord, and they were blessed. On the other han...","summary_en":"Intermarriage and Divorce God had warned his people not to intermarry with unbelieving foreigners (Deut 7:1-6). The sin was not that they married people from another country or race but that they married people committed to other gods. Moses had married a Cushite woman (Num 12:1), and other foreigners had joined Israel through marriage, notably Rahab the Canaanite (see Matt 1:5) and Ruth the Moabite (Ruth 4:1-22). These women embraced faith in the Lord, and they were blessed. On the other han...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88697,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Family Redeemer","title_en":"The Family Redeemer","content_ro":"<h3>The Family Redeemer<\/h3>\n<p>The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24).<\/p>\n<p>According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel:<\/p>\n<p>1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a family member was to pay off the debt so the land would remain in the family. If no relative could purchase the land and the seller was unable to buy it back, the land still reverted to the seller or his heirs in the Jubilee (fiftieth) Year. Two examples of family redeemers buying land for their relatives are Boaz (Ruth 4:1-12) and Jeremiah (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>2. Similarly, if an Israelite became so poor he had to sell himself into debt-slavery, a family redeemer was to buy his relative from service to a non-relative (Lev 25:35-55). The poor Israelite would pay off his debt by working for his relative, who could be expected to treat him better than a stranger would.<\/p>\n<p>3. The family redeemer was to pursue justice for an Israelite killed by another’s hand, under conditions described in Num 35:9-34.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of the family redeemer reminds us that God is the true owner of all things, and he commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:18; Matt 22:39-40). The New Testament presents Jesus as the perfect family redeemer, buying us from the slavery to sin and death into which we had sold ourselves (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9; cp. Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 130:8; Isa 44:22; 59:20; 63:9; Jer 31:11). In the spirit of the Old Testament family redeemer (such as Boaz) and following the example of our great Redeemer, we, too, are commanded to act with love and compassion toward others (Lev 19:11-18; Matt 5:43-48; 19:19; 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 25:23-55; Num 35:9-34; Ruth 2:20; 3:9, 12; 4:1-10; Isa 59:20; Jer 32:6-15; Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Family Redeemer<\/h3>\n<p>The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24).<\/p>\n<p>According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel:<\/p>\n<p>1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a family member was to pay off the debt so the land would remain in the family. If no relative could purchase the land and the seller was unable to buy it back, the land still reverted to the seller or his heirs in the Jubilee (fiftieth) Year. Two examples of family redeemers buying land for their relatives are Boaz (Ruth 4:1-12) and Jeremiah (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>2. Similarly, if an Israelite became so poor he had to sell himself into debt-slavery, a family redeemer was to buy his relative from service to a non-relative (Lev 25:35-55). The poor Israelite would pay off his debt by working for his relative, who could be expected to treat him better than a stranger would.<\/p>\n<p>3. The family redeemer was to pursue justice for an Israelite killed by another’s hand, under conditions described in Num 35:9-34.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of the family redeemer reminds us that God is the true owner of all things, and he commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:18; Matt 22:39-40). The New Testament presents Jesus as the perfect family redeemer, buying us from the slavery to sin and death into which we had sold ourselves (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9; cp. Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 130:8; Isa 44:22; 59:20; 63:9; Jer 31:11). In the spirit of the Old Testament family redeemer (such as Boaz) and following the example of our great Redeemer, we, too, are commanded to act with love and compassion toward others (Lev 19:11-18; Matt 5:43-48; 19:19; 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 25:23-55; Num 35:9-34; Ruth 2:20; 3:9, 12; 4:1-10; Isa 59:20; Jer 32:6-15; Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Family Redeemer The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24). According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel: 1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a fam...","summary_en":"The Family Redeemer The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24). According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel: 1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a fam...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":89746,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Intermarriage and Divorce","title_en":"Intermarriage and Divorce","content_ro":"<h3>Intermarriage and Divorce<\/h3>\n<p>God had warned his people not to intermarry with unbelieving foreigners (Deut 7:1-6). The sin was not that they married people from another country or race but that they married people committed to other gods. Moses had married a Cushite woman (Num 12:1), and other foreigners had joined Israel through marriage, notably Rahab the Canaanite (see Matt 1:5) and Ruth the Moabite (Ruth 4:1-22). These women embraced faith in the Lord, and they were blessed. On the other hand, Solomon had taken many foreign wives, and their devotion to other gods led him into idolatry, just as the Lord had warned (1 Kgs 11:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The marriage covenant is sacred, but it was even more important for Israel to remain faithful to the Lord’s covenant with them as a people. Mixed marriages would produce children who were not fully committed to Israel’s faith, having been influenced by their foreign parent’s idolatrous beliefs. This compromise would lead Israel back to where they were before the Exile—to wholesale unfaithfulness to God and a wholehearted embrace of false religions (see Judg 3:3-7; 14:1-9; 1 Kgs 11:1-8; 2 Kgs 17:7-17).<\/p>\n<p>In Ezra 9 and 10, the Jews who had returned from exile had married people who served other gods. Ezra’s solution (divorce) is not prescriptive for believers today. In the new covenant under Christ, the faith of a believer sanctifies his or her marriage and children, so marriage to an unbeliever does not threaten the identity or purity of the community of God’s people (1 Cor 7:14-16). The apostle Paul realized that divorce might occur when believers and unbelievers married, but he did not encourage believers in that situation to seek a divorce (1 Cor 7:10-13). Certainly, the wise policy to avoid these problems is to heed Paul’s advice not to marry an unbeliever in the first place. God’s people need to remain separated from what is unholy: “How can righteousness be a partner with wickedness? How can light live with darkness? What harmony can there be between Christ and the devil? How can a believer be a partner with an unbeliever?” (2 Cor 6:14-15). But those who are married to an unbeliever today have God’s assurance that he can use that difficult situation for his glory (see also 1 Pet 3:1-2).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 7:1-6; Josh 2:1-14; 6:23-25; Judg 3:3-7; 14:1-9; Ruth 4:1-22; 1 Kgs 11:1-8; 2 Kgs 17:7-17; Ezra 9:1–10:44; 1 Cor 7:10-16; 2 Cor 6:14-15; Heb 11:31<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Intermarriage and Divorce<\/h3>\n<p>God had warned his people not to intermarry with unbelieving foreigners (Deut 7:1-6). The sin was not that they married people from another country or race but that they married people committed to other gods. Moses had married a Cushite woman (Num 12:1), and other foreigners had joined Israel through marriage, notably Rahab the Canaanite (see Matt 1:5) and Ruth the Moabite (Ruth 4:1-22). These women embraced faith in the Lord, and they were blessed. On the other hand, Solomon had taken many foreign wives, and their devotion to other gods led him into idolatry, just as the Lord had warned (1 Kgs 11:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The marriage covenant is sacred, but it was even more important for Israel to remain faithful to the Lord’s covenant with them as a people. Mixed marriages would produce children who were not fully committed to Israel’s faith, having been influenced by their foreign parent’s idolatrous beliefs. This compromise would lead Israel back to where they were before the Exile—to wholesale unfaithfulness to God and a wholehearted embrace of false religions (see Judg 3:3-7; 14:1-9; 1 Kgs 11:1-8; 2 Kgs 17:7-17).<\/p>\n<p>In Ezra 9 and 10, the Jews who had returned from exile had married people who served other gods. Ezra’s solution (divorce) is not prescriptive for believers today. In the new covenant under Christ, the faith of a believer sanctifies his or her marriage and children, so marriage to an unbeliever does not threaten the identity or purity of the community of God’s people (1 Cor 7:14-16). The apostle Paul realized that divorce might occur when believers and unbelievers married, but he did not encourage believers in that situation to seek a divorce (1 Cor 7:10-13). Certainly, the wise policy to avoid these problems is to heed Paul’s advice not to marry an unbeliever in the first place. God’s people need to remain separated from what is unholy: “How can righteousness be a partner with wickedness? How can light live with darkness? What harmony can there be between Christ and the devil? How can a believer be a partner with an unbeliever?” (2 Cor 6:14-15). But those who are married to an unbeliever today have God’s assurance that he can use that difficult situation for his glory (see also 1 Pet 3:1-2).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 7:1-6; Josh 2:1-14; 6:23-25; Judg 3:3-7; 14:1-9; Ruth 4:1-22; 1 Kgs 11:1-8; 2 Kgs 17:7-17; Ezra 9:1–10:44; 1 Cor 7:10-16; 2 Cor 6:14-15; Heb 11:31<\/p>","summary_ro":"Intermarriage and Divorce God had warned his people not to intermarry with unbelieving foreigners (Deut 7:1-6). The sin was not that they married people from another country or race but that they married people committed to other gods. Moses had married a Cushite woman (Num 12:1), and other foreigners had joined Israel through marriage, notably Rahab the Canaanite (see Matt 1:5) and Ruth the Moabite (Ruth 4:1-22). These women embraced faith in the Lord, and they were blessed. On the other han...","summary_en":"Intermarriage and Divorce God had warned his people not to intermarry with unbelieving foreigners (Deut 7:1-6). The sin was not that they married people from another country or race but that they married people committed to other gods. Moses had married a Cushite woman (Num 12:1), and other foreigners had joined Israel through marriage, notably Rahab the Canaanite (see Matt 1:5) and Ruth the Moabite (Ruth 4:1-22). These women embraced faith in the Lord, and they were blessed. On the other han...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116323,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Family Redeemer","title_en":"The Family Redeemer","content_ro":"<h3>The Family Redeemer<\/h3>\n<p>The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24).<\/p>\n<p>According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel:<\/p>\n<p>1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a family member was to pay off the debt so the land would remain in the family. If no relative could purchase the land and the seller was unable to buy it back, the land still reverted to the seller or his heirs in the Jubilee (fiftieth) Year. Two examples of family redeemers buying land for their relatives are Boaz (Ruth 4:1-12) and Jeremiah (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>2. Similarly, if an Israelite became so poor he had to sell himself into debt-slavery, a family redeemer was to buy his relative from service to a non-relative (Lev 25:35-55). The poor Israelite would pay off his debt by working for his relative, who could be expected to treat him better than a stranger would.<\/p>\n<p>3. The family redeemer was to pursue justice for an Israelite killed by another’s hand, under conditions described in Num 35:9-34.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of the family redeemer reminds us that God is the true owner of all things, and he commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:18; Matt 22:39-40). The New Testament presents Jesus as the perfect family redeemer, buying us from the slavery to sin and death into which we had sold ourselves (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9; cp. Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 130:8; Isa 44:22; 59:20; 63:9; Jer 31:11). In the spirit of the Old Testament family redeemer (such as Boaz) and following the example of our great Redeemer, we, too, are commanded to act with love and compassion toward others (Lev 19:11-18; Matt 5:43-48; 19:19; 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 25:23-55; Num 35:9-34; Ruth 2:20; 3:9, 12; 4:1-10; Isa 59:20; Jer 32:6-15; Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Family Redeemer<\/h3>\n<p>The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24).<\/p>\n<p>According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel:<\/p>\n<p>1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a family member was to pay off the debt so the land would remain in the family. If no relative could purchase the land and the seller was unable to buy it back, the land still reverted to the seller or his heirs in the Jubilee (fiftieth) Year. Two examples of family redeemers buying land for their relatives are Boaz (Ruth 4:1-12) and Jeremiah (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>2. Similarly, if an Israelite became so poor he had to sell himself into debt-slavery, a family redeemer was to buy his relative from service to a non-relative (Lev 25:35-55). The poor Israelite would pay off his debt by working for his relative, who could be expected to treat him better than a stranger would.<\/p>\n<p>3. The family redeemer was to pursue justice for an Israelite killed by another’s hand, under conditions described in Num 35:9-34.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of the family redeemer reminds us that God is the true owner of all things, and he commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:18; Matt 22:39-40). The New Testament presents Jesus as the perfect family redeemer, buying us from the slavery to sin and death into which we had sold ourselves (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9; cp. Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 130:8; Isa 44:22; 59:20; 63:9; Jer 31:11). In the spirit of the Old Testament family redeemer (such as Boaz) and following the example of our great Redeemer, we, too, are commanded to act with love and compassion toward others (Lev 19:11-18; Matt 5:43-48; 19:19; 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 25:23-55; Num 35:9-34; Ruth 2:20; 3:9, 12; 4:1-10; Isa 59:20; Jer 32:6-15; Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Family Redeemer The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24). According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel: 1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a fam...","summary_en":"The Family Redeemer The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24). According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel: 1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a fam...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":117372,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Intermarriage and Divorce","title_en":"Intermarriage and Divorce","content_ro":"<h3>Intermarriage and Divorce<\/h3>\n<p>God had warned his people not to intermarry with unbelieving foreigners (Deut 7:1-6). The sin was not that they married people from another country or race but that they married people committed to other gods. Moses had married a Cushite woman (Num 12:1), and other foreigners had joined Israel through marriage, notably Rahab the Canaanite (see Matt 1:5) and Ruth the Moabite (Ruth 4:1-22). These women embraced faith in the Lord, and they were blessed. On the other hand, Solomon had taken many foreign wives, and their devotion to other gods led him into idolatry, just as the Lord had warned (1 Kgs 11:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The marriage covenant is sacred, but it was even more important for Israel to remain faithful to the Lord’s covenant with them as a people. Mixed marriages would produce children who were not fully committed to Israel’s faith, having been influenced by their foreign parent’s idolatrous beliefs. This compromise would lead Israel back to where they were before the Exile—to wholesale unfaithfulness to God and a wholehearted embrace of false religions (see Judg 3:3-7; 14:1-9; 1 Kgs 11:1-8; 2 Kgs 17:7-17).<\/p>\n<p>In Ezra 9 and 10, the Jews who had returned from exile had married people who served other gods. Ezra’s solution (divorce) is not prescriptive for believers today. In the new covenant under Christ, the faith of a believer sanctifies his or her marriage and children, so marriage to an unbeliever does not threaten the identity or purity of the community of God’s people (1 Cor 7:14-16). The apostle Paul realized that divorce might occur when believers and unbelievers married, but he did not encourage believers in that situation to seek a divorce (1 Cor 7:10-13). Certainly, the wise policy to avoid these problems is to heed Paul’s advice not to marry an unbeliever in the first place. God’s people need to remain separated from what is unholy: “How can righteousness be a partner with wickedness? How can light live with darkness? What harmony can there be between Christ and the devil? How can a believer be a partner with an unbeliever?” (2 Cor 6:14-15). But those who are married to an unbeliever today have God’s assurance that he can use that difficult situation for his glory (see also 1 Pet 3:1-2).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 7:1-6; Josh 2:1-14; 6:23-25; Judg 3:3-7; 14:1-9; Ruth 4:1-22; 1 Kgs 11:1-8; 2 Kgs 17:7-17; Ezra 9:1–10:44; 1 Cor 7:10-16; 2 Cor 6:14-15; Heb 11:31<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Intermarriage and Divorce<\/h3>\n<p>God had warned his people not to intermarry with unbelieving foreigners (Deut 7:1-6). The sin was not that they married people from another country or race but that they married people committed to other gods. Moses had married a Cushite woman (Num 12:1), and other foreigners had joined Israel through marriage, notably Rahab the Canaanite (see Matt 1:5) and Ruth the Moabite (Ruth 4:1-22). These women embraced faith in the Lord, and they were blessed. On the other hand, Solomon had taken many foreign wives, and their devotion to other gods led him into idolatry, just as the Lord had warned (1 Kgs 11:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The marriage covenant is sacred, but it was even more important for Israel to remain faithful to the Lord’s covenant with them as a people. Mixed marriages would produce children who were not fully committed to Israel’s faith, having been influenced by their foreign parent’s idolatrous beliefs. This compromise would lead Israel back to where they were before the Exile—to wholesale unfaithfulness to God and a wholehearted embrace of false religions (see Judg 3:3-7; 14:1-9; 1 Kgs 11:1-8; 2 Kgs 17:7-17).<\/p>\n<p>In Ezra 9 and 10, the Jews who had returned from exile had married people who served other gods. Ezra’s solution (divorce) is not prescriptive for believers today. In the new covenant under Christ, the faith of a believer sanctifies his or her marriage and children, so marriage to an unbeliever does not threaten the identity or purity of the community of God’s people (1 Cor 7:14-16). The apostle Paul realized that divorce might occur when believers and unbelievers married, but he did not encourage believers in that situation to seek a divorce (1 Cor 7:10-13). Certainly, the wise policy to avoid these problems is to heed Paul’s advice not to marry an unbeliever in the first place. God’s people need to remain separated from what is unholy: “How can righteousness be a partner with wickedness? How can light live with darkness? What harmony can there be between Christ and the devil? How can a believer be a partner with an unbeliever?” (2 Cor 6:14-15). But those who are married to an unbeliever today have God’s assurance that he can use that difficult situation for his glory (see also 1 Pet 3:1-2).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 7:1-6; Josh 2:1-14; 6:23-25; Judg 3:3-7; 14:1-9; Ruth 4:1-22; 1 Kgs 11:1-8; 2 Kgs 17:7-17; Ezra 9:1–10:44; 1 Cor 7:10-16; 2 Cor 6:14-15; Heb 11:31<\/p>","summary_ro":"Intermarriage and Divorce God had warned his people not to intermarry with unbelieving foreigners (Deut 7:1-6). The sin was not that they married people from another country or race but that they married people committed to other gods. Moses had married a Cushite woman (Num 12:1), and other foreigners had joined Israel through marriage, notably Rahab the Canaanite (see Matt 1:5) and Ruth the Moabite (Ruth 4:1-22). These women embraced faith in the Lord, and they were blessed. On the other han...","summary_en":"Intermarriage and Divorce God had warned his people not to intermarry with unbelieving foreigners (Deut 7:1-6). The sin was not that they married people from another country or race but that they married people committed to other gods. Moses had married a Cushite woman (Num 12:1), and other foreigners had joined Israel through marriage, notably Rahab the Canaanite (see Matt 1:5) and Ruth the Moabite (Ruth 4:1-22). These women embraced faith in the Lord, and they were blessed. On the other han...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143949,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Family Redeemer","title_en":"The Family Redeemer","content_ro":"<h3>The Family Redeemer<\/h3>\n<p>The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24).<\/p>\n<p>According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel:<\/p>\n<p>1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a family member was to pay off the debt so the land would remain in the family. If no relative could purchase the land and the seller was unable to buy it back, the land still reverted to the seller or his heirs in the Jubilee (fiftieth) Year. Two examples of family redeemers buying land for their relatives are Boaz (Ruth 4:1-12) and Jeremiah (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>2. Similarly, if an Israelite became so poor he had to sell himself into debt-slavery, a family redeemer was to buy his relative from service to a non-relative (Lev 25:35-55). The poor Israelite would pay off his debt by working for his relative, who could be expected to treat him better than a stranger would.<\/p>\n<p>3. The family redeemer was to pursue justice for an Israelite killed by another’s hand, under conditions described in Num 35:9-34.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of the family redeemer reminds us that God is the true owner of all things, and he commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:18; Matt 22:39-40). The New Testament presents Jesus as the perfect family redeemer, buying us from the slavery to sin and death into which we had sold ourselves (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9; cp. Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 130:8; Isa 44:22; 59:20; 63:9; Jer 31:11). In the spirit of the Old Testament family redeemer (such as Boaz) and following the example of our great Redeemer, we, too, are commanded to act with love and compassion toward others (Lev 19:11-18; Matt 5:43-48; 19:19; 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 25:23-55; Num 35:9-34; Ruth 2:20; 3:9, 12; 4:1-10; Isa 59:20; Jer 32:6-15; Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Family Redeemer<\/h3>\n<p>The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24).<\/p>\n<p>According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel:<\/p>\n<p>1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a family member was to pay off the debt so the land would remain in the family. If no relative could purchase the land and the seller was unable to buy it back, the land still reverted to the seller or his heirs in the Jubilee (fiftieth) Year. Two examples of family redeemers buying land for their relatives are Boaz (Ruth 4:1-12) and Jeremiah (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>2. Similarly, if an Israelite became so poor he had to sell himself into debt-slavery, a family redeemer was to buy his relative from service to a non-relative (Lev 25:35-55). The poor Israelite would pay off his debt by working for his relative, who could be expected to treat him better than a stranger would.<\/p>\n<p>3. The family redeemer was to pursue justice for an Israelite killed by another’s hand, under conditions described in Num 35:9-34.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of the family redeemer reminds us that God is the true owner of all things, and he commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:18; Matt 22:39-40). The New Testament presents Jesus as the perfect family redeemer, buying us from the slavery to sin and death into which we had sold ourselves (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9; cp. Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 130:8; Isa 44:22; 59:20; 63:9; Jer 31:11). In the spirit of the Old Testament family redeemer (such as Boaz) and following the example of our great Redeemer, we, too, are commanded to act with love and compassion toward others (Lev 19:11-18; Matt 5:43-48; 19:19; 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 25:23-55; Num 35:9-34; Ruth 2:20; 3:9, 12; 4:1-10; Isa 59:20; Jer 32:6-15; Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Family Redeemer The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24). According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel: 1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a fam...","summary_en":"The Family Redeemer The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24). According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel: 1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a fam...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144998,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Intermarriage and Divorce","title_en":"Intermarriage and Divorce","content_ro":"<h3>Intermarriage and Divorce<\/h3>\n<p>God had warned his people not to intermarry with unbelieving foreigners (Deut 7:1-6). The sin was not that they married people from another country or race but that they married people committed to other gods. Moses had married a Cushite woman (Num 12:1), and other foreigners had joined Israel through marriage, notably Rahab the Canaanite (see Matt 1:5) and Ruth the Moabite (Ruth 4:1-22). These women embraced faith in the Lord, and they were blessed. On the other hand, Solomon had taken many foreign wives, and their devotion to other gods led him into idolatry, just as the Lord had warned (1 Kgs 11:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The marriage covenant is sacred, but it was even more important for Israel to remain faithful to the Lord’s covenant with them as a people. Mixed marriages would produce children who were not fully committed to Israel’s faith, having been influenced by their foreign parent’s idolatrous beliefs. This compromise would lead Israel back to where they were before the Exile—to wholesale unfaithfulness to God and a wholehearted embrace of false religions (see Judg 3:3-7; 14:1-9; 1 Kgs 11:1-8; 2 Kgs 17:7-17).<\/p>\n<p>In Ezra 9 and 10, the Jews who had returned from exile had married people who served other gods. Ezra’s solution (divorce) is not prescriptive for believers today. In the new covenant under Christ, the faith of a believer sanctifies his or her marriage and children, so marriage to an unbeliever does not threaten the identity or purity of the community of God’s people (1 Cor 7:14-16). The apostle Paul realized that divorce might occur when believers and unbelievers married, but he did not encourage believers in that situation to seek a divorce (1 Cor 7:10-13). Certainly, the wise policy to avoid these problems is to heed Paul’s advice not to marry an unbeliever in the first place. God’s people need to remain separated from what is unholy: “How can righteousness be a partner with wickedness? How can light live with darkness? What harmony can there be between Christ and the devil? How can a believer be a partner with an unbeliever?” (2 Cor 6:14-15). But those who are married to an unbeliever today have God’s assurance that he can use that difficult situation for his glory (see also 1 Pet 3:1-2).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 7:1-6; Josh 2:1-14; 6:23-25; Judg 3:3-7; 14:1-9; Ruth 4:1-22; 1 Kgs 11:1-8; 2 Kgs 17:7-17; Ezra 9:1–10:44; 1 Cor 7:10-16; 2 Cor 6:14-15; Heb 11:31<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Intermarriage and Divorce<\/h3>\n<p>God had warned his people not to intermarry with unbelieving foreigners (Deut 7:1-6). The sin was not that they married people from another country or race but that they married people committed to other gods. Moses had married a Cushite woman (Num 12:1), and other foreigners had joined Israel through marriage, notably Rahab the Canaanite (see Matt 1:5) and Ruth the Moabite (Ruth 4:1-22). These women embraced faith in the Lord, and they were blessed. On the other hand, Solomon had taken many foreign wives, and their devotion to other gods led him into idolatry, just as the Lord had warned (1 Kgs 11:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The marriage covenant is sacred, but it was even more important for Israel to remain faithful to the Lord’s covenant with them as a people. Mixed marriages would produce children who were not fully committed to Israel’s faith, having been influenced by their foreign parent’s idolatrous beliefs. This compromise would lead Israel back to where they were before the Exile—to wholesale unfaithfulness to God and a wholehearted embrace of false religions (see Judg 3:3-7; 14:1-9; 1 Kgs 11:1-8; 2 Kgs 17:7-17).<\/p>\n<p>In Ezra 9 and 10, the Jews who had returned from exile had married people who served other gods. Ezra’s solution (divorce) is not prescriptive for believers today. In the new covenant under Christ, the faith of a believer sanctifies his or her marriage and children, so marriage to an unbeliever does not threaten the identity or purity of the community of God’s people (1 Cor 7:14-16). The apostle Paul realized that divorce might occur when believers and unbelievers married, but he did not encourage believers in that situation to seek a divorce (1 Cor 7:10-13). Certainly, the wise policy to avoid these problems is to heed Paul’s advice not to marry an unbeliever in the first place. God’s people need to remain separated from what is unholy: “How can righteousness be a partner with wickedness? How can light live with darkness? What harmony can there be between Christ and the devil? How can a believer be a partner with an unbeliever?” (2 Cor 6:14-15). But those who are married to an unbeliever today have God’s assurance that he can use that difficult situation for his glory (see also 1 Pet 3:1-2).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 7:1-6; Josh 2:1-14; 6:23-25; Judg 3:3-7; 14:1-9; Ruth 4:1-22; 1 Kgs 11:1-8; 2 Kgs 17:7-17; Ezra 9:1–10:44; 1 Cor 7:10-16; 2 Cor 6:14-15; Heb 11:31<\/p>","summary_ro":"Intermarriage and Divorce God had warned his people not to intermarry with unbelieving foreigners (Deut 7:1-6). The sin was not that they married people from another country or race but that they married people committed to other gods. Moses had married a Cushite woman (Num 12:1), and other foreigners had joined Israel through marriage, notably Rahab the Canaanite (see Matt 1:5) and Ruth the Moabite (Ruth 4:1-22). These women embraced faith in the Lord, and they were blessed. On the other han...","summary_en":"Intermarriage and Divorce God had warned his people not to intermarry with unbelieving foreigners (Deut 7:1-6). The sin was not that they married people from another country or race but that they married people committed to other gods. Moses had married a Cushite woman (Num 12:1), and other foreigners had joined Israel through marriage, notably Rahab the Canaanite (see Matt 1:5) and Ruth the Moabite (Ruth 4:1-22). These women embraced faith in the Lord, and they were blessed. On the other han...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":46018,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:3","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:3<\/strong> <em>Naomi . . . is selling the land:<\/em> Naomi probably did not have control of Elimelech’s ancestral land, though she did have legal title. She was selling the right to redeem it, or buy it back, from whoever was currently using it.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:3<\/strong> <em>Naomi . . . is selling the land:<\/em> Naomi probably did not have control of Elimelech’s ancestral land, though she did have legal title. She was selling the right to redeem it, or buy it back, from whoever was currently using it.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:3 Naomi . . . is selling the land: Naomi probably did not have control of Elimelech’s ancestral land, though she did have legal title. She was selling the right to redeem it, or buy it back, from whoever was currently using it.","summary_en":"4:3 Naomi . . . is selling the land: Naomi probably did not have control of Elimelech’s ancestral land, though she did have legal title. She was selling the right to redeem it, or buy it back, from whoever was currently using it.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73644,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:3","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:3<\/strong> <em>Naomi . . . is selling the land:<\/em> Naomi probably did not have control of Elimelech’s ancestral land, though she did have legal title. She was selling the right to redeem it, or buy it back, from whoever was currently using it.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:3<\/strong> <em>Naomi . . . is selling the land:<\/em> Naomi probably did not have control of Elimelech’s ancestral land, though she did have legal title. She was selling the right to redeem it, or buy it back, from whoever was currently using it.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:3 Naomi . . . is selling the land: Naomi probably did not have control of Elimelech’s ancestral land, though she did have legal title. She was selling the right to redeem it, or buy it back, from whoever was currently using it.","summary_en":"4:3 Naomi . . . is selling the land: Naomi probably did not have control of Elimelech’s ancestral land, though she did have legal title. She was selling the right to redeem it, or buy it back, from whoever was currently using it.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101270,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:3","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:3<\/strong> <em>Naomi . . . is selling the land:<\/em> Naomi probably did not have control of Elimelech’s ancestral land, though she did have legal title. She was selling the right to redeem it, or buy it back, from whoever was currently using it.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:3<\/strong> <em>Naomi . . . is selling the land:<\/em> Naomi probably did not have control of Elimelech’s ancestral land, though she did have legal title. She was selling the right to redeem it, or buy it back, from whoever was currently using it.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:3 Naomi . . . is selling the land: Naomi probably did not have control of Elimelech’s ancestral land, though she did have legal title. She was selling the right to redeem it, or buy it back, from whoever was currently using it.","summary_en":"4:3 Naomi . . . is selling the land: Naomi probably did not have control of Elimelech’s ancestral land, though she did have legal title. She was selling the right to redeem it, or buy it back, from whoever was currently using it.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128896,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:3","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:3<\/strong> <em>Naomi . . . is selling the land:<\/em> Naomi probably did not have control of Elimelech’s ancestral land, though she did have legal title. She was selling the right to redeem it, or buy it back, from whoever was currently using it.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:3<\/strong> <em>Naomi . . . is selling the land:<\/em> Naomi probably did not have control of Elimelech’s ancestral land, though she did have legal title. She was selling the right to redeem it, or buy it back, from whoever was currently using it.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:3 Naomi . . . is selling the land: Naomi probably did not have control of Elimelech’s ancestral land, though she did have legal title. She was selling the right to redeem it, or buy it back, from whoever was currently using it.","summary_en":"4:3 Naomi . . . is selling the land: Naomi probably did not have control of Elimelech’s ancestral land, though she did have legal title. She was selling the right to redeem it, or buy it back, from whoever was currently using it.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"4":[{"id":11961,"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":22136,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Kinsman","title_en":"Kinsman","content_ro":"<h3>KINSMAN<\/h3>\n<p>A relative of the same family. In ancient Israel the tribe was the largest social and political unit. The smallest social unit within the tribe was the family. The relationship of one family to another was carefully regulated by the list of those to whom one should not be married (Lv 18). Those who were related, even though somewhat distantly, received by law privileges and obligations for all members of the family. It was the right of the “kinsman” to receive the inheritance of a family without heir (Nm 27:11). He was also obligated to reclaim property of a kinsman who had gone into debt (Lv 25:25-28), especially if it involved someone’s enslavement to a non-Israelite (vv 47-49). In this function the kinsman <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">karov<\/span><em>)<\/em> becomes the kinsman-redeemer <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span><em>).<\/em> In the book of Ruth, Boaz is the kinsman-redeemer: “The man is our close relative; he is one of our kinsman-redeemers” (Ruth 2:20, <span>niv<\/span>). On legal grounds Boaz had a right to reclaim the property of Naomi, but he was required by law to wait for his turn, as he was not the <em>nearest<\/em> relative (4:4). Only after this nearest relative refused (v 6) did Boaz proceed with his obligation as kinsman.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KINSMAN<\/h3>\n<p>A relative of the same family. In ancient Israel the tribe was the largest social and political unit. The smallest social unit within the tribe was the family. The relationship of one family to another was carefully regulated by the list of those to whom one should not be married (Lv 18). Those who were related, even though somewhat distantly, received by law privileges and obligations for all members of the family. It was the right of the “kinsman” to receive the inheritance of a family without heir (Nm 27:11). He was also obligated to reclaim property of a kinsman who had gone into debt (Lv 25:25-28), especially if it involved someone’s enslavement to a non-Israelite (vv 47-49). In this function the kinsman <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">karov<\/span><em>)<\/em> becomes the kinsman-redeemer <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span><em>).<\/em> In the book of Ruth, Boaz is the kinsman-redeemer: “The man is our close relative; he is one of our kinsman-redeemers” (Ruth 2:20, <span>niv<\/span>). On legal grounds Boaz had a right to reclaim the property of Naomi, but he was required by law to wait for his turn, as he was not the <em>nearest<\/em> relative (4:4). Only after this nearest relative refused (v 6) did Boaz proceed with his obligation as kinsman.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KINSMAN A relative of the same family. In ancient Israel the tribe was the largest social and political unit. The smallest social unit within the tribe was the family. The relationship of one family to another was carefully regulated by the list of those to whom one should not be married (Lv 18). Those who were related, even though somewhat distantly, received by law privileges and obligations for all members of the family. It was the right of the “kinsman” to receive the inheritance of a fam...","summary_en":"KINSMAN A relative of the same family. In ancient Israel the tribe was the largest social and political unit. The smallest social unit within the tribe was the family. The relationship of one family to another was carefully regulated by the list of those to whom one should not be married (Lv 18). Those who were related, even though somewhat distantly, received by law privileges and obligations for all members of the family. It was the right of the “kinsman” to receive the inheritance of a fam...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32420,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ransom","title_en":"Ransom","content_ro":"<h3>RANSOM<\/h3>\n<p>Price for redeeming or liberating slaves, captives, property, or life. Jesus described his entire ministry as one of service in giving his life as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). Hence, “ransom” is closely linked to such terms as “redemption” and “salvation,” to the satisfaction Christ made in atonement for sin.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the OT God provided various regulations for his covenant people whereby life and property could be “redeemed,” “bought back,” or “set free” by payment of ransom (cf. Lv 25–27). Ransom involved a price paid as a substitute for that which was redeemed or set free.<\/p>\n<p>The OT uses three different Hebrew words for ransom or redemption. Only when there is a clear indication of the payment of a price are these terms translated by “ransom.” But even when another term, such as “redemption,” is used in English translation, a ransom price is usually implied.<\/p>\n<p>One of the Hebrew terms (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kopher<\/span>) means a “cover” or a “covering.” It was a replacement payment made in exchange for punishment. A ransom could be paid to redeem the life of the owner of an ox that had gored a person to death (Ex 21:30). A half-shekel ransom price was required by God for each Israelite at census taking to prevent a plague (30:12), and this “atonement money” was an offering to the Lord for use in the tabernacle service. A murderer could not be ransomed, and anyone who found safety in a city of refuge could not be taken back by ransom (Nm 35:31-32). It was impossible to avoid death by paying a ransom (Ps 49:7-9). But in a few instances the term takes on the meaning of a “bribe” or “hush money” (1 Sm 12:3; Prv 6:35; Am 5:12).<\/p>\n<p>A second Hebrew word-family for “ransom” and “redemption” is related to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span><em>.<\/em> <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Go’el<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning a “reclaimant” or “redeemer,” derives from the root meaning of the Hebrew term “to restore, repair, deliver, rescue.” The term refers to God’s family-law regulations that place various obligations on a relative or kinsman (Lv 25:25-55). The kinsman had the right and duty of redeeming by ransom any family property that a person was compelled to sell (Lv 25:25-34; Ru 4:4-6); of ransoming a relative who was compelled by poverty to sell himself as a slave to a stranger or sojourner (Lv 25:47-55); and of acting as avenger of the blood of a dead relative, thus enforcing the claim for satisfaction for shedding his blood (Nm 35:19-27; Jos 20:3-5). The kinsman was also obligated to marry the wife of a dead brother who had died without leaving children so that the kinsman might raise up seed and the brother’s name not be forgotten in Israel (Ru 3:9-13; 4:1-12). In a general sense the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> was a “vindicator” or “redeemer”; a familiar example is Job’s cry for God to vindicate him (Jb 19:25). In the highest sense, God is the kinsman and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> of Israel, redeeming them from the bondage of Egypt (Ex 6:5-7), from captivity in Babylon, and from distress in general (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> occurs 13 times in Is 40–46). Thus Israel is called “the ransomed of the Lord” (Is 35:10), having been “redeemed without money” (52:3). In such contexts, however, the cost is indicated in terms of God’s might and power.<\/p>\n<p>The OT uses a third Hebrew word (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">pidyon<\/span>) from the area of commercial law for ransom or payment. Since God spared the firstborn in Israel at the time of Passover, the first offspring of every womb belonged to God, and the oldest male was redeemed by ransom (Ex 13:12-15; 34:20; Lv 27:27; Nm 18:15-17). Later the entire tribe of Levi was set aside as priestly substitutes for the firstborn. Since there were 273 more firstborn than Levites, a payment of five shekels was paid in ransom for each (Nm 3:40-46). This term was also used for the price paid to ransom a slave from slavery (Dt 15:15; 24:18); a slave concubine could also be ransomed (Ex 21:8-11; Lv 19:20). God motivates these provisions by his own ransoming of Israel as slaves in Egypt (Dt 15:15; 24:18). This Hebrew term is also applied to God’s deliverance of Israel from Egypt (Dt 7:8; 9:26; 13:5; 2 Sm 7:23; 1 Chr 17:21; Ps 78:42) and from Babylonian captivity (Is 35:10; 51:11). Sometimes God ransoms without reference to a specific occasion (Hos 7:13; cf. Dt 21:8; Neh 1:10; Is 1:27; Jer 31:11). God also ransoms from the grave (Hos 13:14), from iniquities (Ps 130:8), and from troubles (25:22). This deliverance always implies some sort of payment or cost, such as “the mighty power” or “strong hand” of God needed for the redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT there is just one family of words used for ransom. The term basically means “to loose” or “to set free.” It denotes releasing, redeeming, or liberating on payment of the ransom price. The translation “ransom” is restricted to approximately eight instances where there is a clear reference to the payment of some sort of price. The translators of the Septuagint restricted their use of this Greek word to those instances where the three Hebrew terms clearly meant ransom payment.<\/p>\n<p>The most important occurrence in the NT is Jesus’ description of his death “as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). Three features stand out in Jesus’ words: his service is one of ransom; his self-sacrifice is the ransom price; and his ransom is substitutionary in character. “He gave his life to purchase freedom for everyone” (1 Tm 2:6). Jesus Christ “gave his life to free us from every kind of sin” (Ti 2:14). The ransom price was “the precious blood of Christ,” who was an unblemished lamb (1 Pt 1:18-19), thus linking Christ’s self-sacrifice to the sacrifices of the OT that pointed to him. The blood of goats and calves was not able to save, but an eternal redemption was obtained by Christ’s blood (Heb 9:12). In heaven the redeemed sing the new song to the Lamb whose blood ransomed them (Rv 5:9; cf. 14:3-4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Redeemer, Redemption.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RANSOM<\/h3>\n<p>Price for redeeming or liberating slaves, captives, property, or life. Jesus described his entire ministry as one of service in giving his life as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). Hence, “ransom” is closely linked to such terms as “redemption” and “salvation,” to the satisfaction Christ made in atonement for sin.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the OT God provided various regulations for his covenant people whereby life and property could be “redeemed,” “bought back,” or “set free” by payment of ransom (cf. Lv 25–27). Ransom involved a price paid as a substitute for that which was redeemed or set free.<\/p>\n<p>The OT uses three different Hebrew words for ransom or redemption. Only when there is a clear indication of the payment of a price are these terms translated by “ransom.” But even when another term, such as “redemption,” is used in English translation, a ransom price is usually implied.<\/p>\n<p>One of the Hebrew terms (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kopher<\/span>) means a “cover” or a “covering.” It was a replacement payment made in exchange for punishment. A ransom could be paid to redeem the life of the owner of an ox that had gored a person to death (Ex 21:30). A half-shekel ransom price was required by God for each Israelite at census taking to prevent a plague (30:12), and this “atonement money” was an offering to the Lord for use in the tabernacle service. A murderer could not be ransomed, and anyone who found safety in a city of refuge could not be taken back by ransom (Nm 35:31-32). It was impossible to avoid death by paying a ransom (Ps 49:7-9). But in a few instances the term takes on the meaning of a “bribe” or “hush money” (1 Sm 12:3; Prv 6:35; Am 5:12).<\/p>\n<p>A second Hebrew word-family for “ransom” and “redemption” is related to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span><em>.<\/em> <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Go’el<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning a “reclaimant” or “redeemer,” derives from the root meaning of the Hebrew term “to restore, repair, deliver, rescue.” The term refers to God’s family-law regulations that place various obligations on a relative or kinsman (Lv 25:25-55). The kinsman had the right and duty of redeeming by ransom any family property that a person was compelled to sell (Lv 25:25-34; Ru 4:4-6); of ransoming a relative who was compelled by poverty to sell himself as a slave to a stranger or sojourner (Lv 25:47-55); and of acting as avenger of the blood of a dead relative, thus enforcing the claim for satisfaction for shedding his blood (Nm 35:19-27; Jos 20:3-5). The kinsman was also obligated to marry the wife of a dead brother who had died without leaving children so that the kinsman might raise up seed and the brother’s name not be forgotten in Israel (Ru 3:9-13; 4:1-12). In a general sense the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> was a “vindicator” or “redeemer”; a familiar example is Job’s cry for God to vindicate him (Jb 19:25). In the highest sense, God is the kinsman and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> of Israel, redeeming them from the bondage of Egypt (Ex 6:5-7), from captivity in Babylon, and from distress in general (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> occurs 13 times in Is 40–46). Thus Israel is called “the ransomed of the Lord” (Is 35:10), having been “redeemed without money” (52:3). In such contexts, however, the cost is indicated in terms of God’s might and power.<\/p>\n<p>The OT uses a third Hebrew word (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">pidyon<\/span>) from the area of commercial law for ransom or payment. Since God spared the firstborn in Israel at the time of Passover, the first offspring of every womb belonged to God, and the oldest male was redeemed by ransom (Ex 13:12-15; 34:20; Lv 27:27; Nm 18:15-17). Later the entire tribe of Levi was set aside as priestly substitutes for the firstborn. Since there were 273 more firstborn than Levites, a payment of five shekels was paid in ransom for each (Nm 3:40-46). This term was also used for the price paid to ransom a slave from slavery (Dt 15:15; 24:18); a slave concubine could also be ransomed (Ex 21:8-11; Lv 19:20). God motivates these provisions by his own ransoming of Israel as slaves in Egypt (Dt 15:15; 24:18). This Hebrew term is also applied to God’s deliverance of Israel from Egypt (Dt 7:8; 9:26; 13:5; 2 Sm 7:23; 1 Chr 17:21; Ps 78:42) and from Babylonian captivity (Is 35:10; 51:11). Sometimes God ransoms without reference to a specific occasion (Hos 7:13; cf. Dt 21:8; Neh 1:10; Is 1:27; Jer 31:11). God also ransoms from the grave (Hos 13:14), from iniquities (Ps 130:8), and from troubles (25:22). This deliverance always implies some sort of payment or cost, such as “the mighty power” or “strong hand” of God needed for the redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT there is just one family of words used for ransom. The term basically means “to loose” or “to set free.” It denotes releasing, redeeming, or liberating on payment of the ransom price. The translation “ransom” is restricted to approximately eight instances where there is a clear reference to the payment of some sort of price. The translators of the Septuagint restricted their use of this Greek word to those instances where the three Hebrew terms clearly meant ransom payment.<\/p>\n<p>The most important occurrence in the NT is Jesus’ description of his death “as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). Three features stand out in Jesus’ words: his service is one of ransom; his self-sacrifice is the ransom price; and his ransom is substitutionary in character. “He gave his life to purchase freedom for everyone” (1 Tm 2:6). Jesus Christ “gave his life to free us from every kind of sin” (Ti 2:14). The ransom price was “the precious blood of Christ,” who was an unblemished lamb (1 Pt 1:18-19), thus linking Christ’s self-sacrifice to the sacrifices of the OT that pointed to him. The blood of goats and calves was not able to save, but an eternal redemption was obtained by Christ’s blood (Heb 9:12). In heaven the redeemed sing the new song to the Lamb whose blood ransomed them (Rv 5:9; cf. 14:3-4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Redeemer, Redemption.<\/p>","summary_ro":"RANSOM Price for redeeming or liberating slaves, captives, property, or life. Jesus described his entire ministry as one of service in giving his life as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). Hence, “ransom” is closely linked to such terms as “redemption” and “salvation,” to the satisfaction Christ made in atonement for sin. In the Old Testament In the OT God provided various regulations for his covenant people whereby life and property could be “redeemed,” “bought back,” or “set free” by p...","summary_en":"RANSOM Price for redeeming or liberating slaves, captives, property, or life. Jesus described his entire ministry as one of service in giving his life as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). Hence, “ransom” is closely linked to such terms as “redemption” and “salvation,” to the satisfaction Christ made in atonement for sin. In the Old Testament In the OT God provided various regulations for his covenant people whereby life and property could be “redeemed,” “bought back,” or “set free” by p...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":46019,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:4","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:4<\/strong> <em>redeem it:<\/em> The law called for a near relative, the family redeemer, to buy land when a landowner had to sell it (see Lev 25:23-34). This practice kept land in the family; the redeemer was a conservator for the land until the destitute landowner could recover economically and buy it back. • <em>All right, I’ll redeem it:<\/em> The kinsman could see a great opportunity—there was no male heir and no apparent likelihood that there would be one, so he could add the land to his own estate while doing his social duty for the family.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:4<\/strong> <em>redeem it:<\/em> The law called for a near relative, the family redeemer, to buy land when a landowner had to sell it (see Lev 25:23-34). This practice kept land in the family; the redeemer was a conservator for the land until the destitute landowner could recover economically and buy it back. • <em>All right, I’ll redeem it:<\/em> The kinsman could see a great opportunity—there was no male heir and no apparent likelihood that there would be one, so he could add the land to his own estate while doing his social duty for the family.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:4 redeem it: The law called for a near relative, the family redeemer, to buy land when a landowner had to sell it (see Lev 25:23-34). This practice kept land in the family; the redeemer was a conservator for the land until the destitute landowner could recover economically and buy it back. • All right, I’ll redeem it: The kinsman could see a great opportunity—there was no male heir and no apparent likelihood that there would be one, so he could add the land to his own estate while doing his...","summary_en":"4:4 redeem it: The law called for a near relative, the family redeemer, to buy land when a landowner had to sell it (see Lev 25:23-34). This practice kept land in the family; the redeemer was a conservator for the land until the destitute landowner could recover economically and buy it back. • All right, I’ll redeem it: The kinsman could see a great opportunity—there was no male heir and no apparent likelihood that there would be one, so he could add the land to his own estate while doing his...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73645,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:4","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:4<\/strong> <em>redeem it:<\/em> The law called for a near relative, the family redeemer, to buy land when a landowner had to sell it (see Lev 25:23-34). This practice kept land in the family; the redeemer was a conservator for the land until the destitute landowner could recover economically and buy it back. • <em>All right, I’ll redeem it:<\/em> The kinsman could see a great opportunity—there was no male heir and no apparent likelihood that there would be one, so he could add the land to his own estate while doing his social duty for the family.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:4<\/strong> <em>redeem it:<\/em> The law called for a near relative, the family redeemer, to buy land when a landowner had to sell it (see Lev 25:23-34). This practice kept land in the family; the redeemer was a conservator for the land until the destitute landowner could recover economically and buy it back. • <em>All right, I’ll redeem it:<\/em> The kinsman could see a great opportunity—there was no male heir and no apparent likelihood that there would be one, so he could add the land to his own estate while doing his social duty for the family.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:4 redeem it: The law called for a near relative, the family redeemer, to buy land when a landowner had to sell it (see Lev 25:23-34). This practice kept land in the family; the redeemer was a conservator for the land until the destitute landowner could recover economically and buy it back. • All right, I’ll redeem it: The kinsman could see a great opportunity—there was no male heir and no apparent likelihood that there would be one, so he could add the land to his own estate while doing his...","summary_en":"4:4 redeem it: The law called for a near relative, the family redeemer, to buy land when a landowner had to sell it (see Lev 25:23-34). This practice kept land in the family; the redeemer was a conservator for the land until the destitute landowner could recover economically and buy it back. • All right, I’ll redeem it: The kinsman could see a great opportunity—there was no male heir and no apparent likelihood that there would be one, so he could add the land to his own estate while doing his...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101271,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:4","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:4<\/strong> <em>redeem it:<\/em> The law called for a near relative, the family redeemer, to buy land when a landowner had to sell it (see Lev 25:23-34). This practice kept land in the family; the redeemer was a conservator for the land until the destitute landowner could recover economically and buy it back. • <em>All right, I’ll redeem it:<\/em> The kinsman could see a great opportunity—there was no male heir and no apparent likelihood that there would be one, so he could add the land to his own estate while doing his social duty for the family.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:4<\/strong> <em>redeem it:<\/em> The law called for a near relative, the family redeemer, to buy land when a landowner had to sell it (see Lev 25:23-34). This practice kept land in the family; the redeemer was a conservator for the land until the destitute landowner could recover economically and buy it back. • <em>All right, I’ll redeem it:<\/em> The kinsman could see a great opportunity—there was no male heir and no apparent likelihood that there would be one, so he could add the land to his own estate while doing his social duty for the family.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:4 redeem it: The law called for a near relative, the family redeemer, to buy land when a landowner had to sell it (see Lev 25:23-34). This practice kept land in the family; the redeemer was a conservator for the land until the destitute landowner could recover economically and buy it back. • All right, I’ll redeem it: The kinsman could see a great opportunity—there was no male heir and no apparent likelihood that there would be one, so he could add the land to his own estate while doing his...","summary_en":"4:4 redeem it: The law called for a near relative, the family redeemer, to buy land when a landowner had to sell it (see Lev 25:23-34). This practice kept land in the family; the redeemer was a conservator for the land until the destitute landowner could recover economically and buy it back. • All right, I’ll redeem it: The kinsman could see a great opportunity—there was no male heir and no apparent likelihood that there would be one, so he could add the land to his own estate while doing his...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128897,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:4","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:4<\/strong> <em>redeem it:<\/em> The law called for a near relative, the family redeemer, to buy land when a landowner had to sell it (see Lev 25:23-34). This practice kept land in the family; the redeemer was a conservator for the land until the destitute landowner could recover economically and buy it back. • <em>All right, I’ll redeem it:<\/em> The kinsman could see a great opportunity—there was no male heir and no apparent likelihood that there would be one, so he could add the land to his own estate while doing his social duty for the family.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:4<\/strong> <em>redeem it:<\/em> The law called for a near relative, the family redeemer, to buy land when a landowner had to sell it (see Lev 25:23-34). This practice kept land in the family; the redeemer was a conservator for the land until the destitute landowner could recover economically and buy it back. • <em>All right, I’ll redeem it:<\/em> The kinsman could see a great opportunity—there was no male heir and no apparent likelihood that there would be one, so he could add the land to his own estate while doing his social duty for the family.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:4 redeem it: The law called for a near relative, the family redeemer, to buy land when a landowner had to sell it (see Lev 25:23-34). This practice kept land in the family; the redeemer was a conservator for the land until the destitute landowner could recover economically and buy it back. • All right, I’ll redeem it: The kinsman could see a great opportunity—there was no male heir and no apparent likelihood that there would be one, so he could add the land to his own estate while doing his...","summary_en":"4:4 redeem it: The law called for a near relative, the family redeemer, to buy land when a landowner had to sell it (see Lev 25:23-34). This practice kept land in the family; the redeemer was a conservator for the land until the destitute landowner could recover economically and buy it back. • All right, I’ll redeem it: The kinsman could see a great opportunity—there was no male heir and no apparent likelihood that there would be one, so he could add the land to his own estate while doing his...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":17449,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Inheritance","title_en":"Inheritance","content_ro":"<h3>INHERITANCE<\/h3>\n<p>Legacy or bequest. Inheritance plays an unusually significant role in the Scriptures when it is used to convey theological truths. As we might expect, these theological applications reflect legal customs in force during OT and NT times.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LegalandHistoricalAspect\">Legal and Historical Aspect<\/p>\n<h5>The Patriarchs<\/h5>\n<p>We learn something of early-second-millennium <span>BC<\/span> practices from the patriarchal stories in Genesis. For example, the narrative indicates that the firstborn could normally expect to receive the birthright. Yet exceptions abound. Ishmael (Gn 16:15; 17:15-21), Esau (25:23), and Reuben (49:3-4) did not receive the birthright. Another item of special interest is Abraham’s suggestion that, in the absence of a son, his servant Eliezer might be regarded as the heir (15:2-5); scholars have found confirmation of this practice in Hurrian legal documents of the second millennium.<\/p>\n<h5>The Hebrew Nation<\/h5>\n<p>According to Deuteronomy 21:15-17, Hebrew firstborns were legally entitled to a double portion of the inheritance. Israelite law also made provision for widows through the practice of levirate marriage (Dt 25:5; see Gn 38:8; Ru 4:5).<\/p>\n<p>According to Numbers 27:1-11, the daughters of Zelophehad argued that they should receive the inheritance since their father had died without sons. Consequently, God decreed that if a man died without sons, the inheritance should be transferred to his daughter; if he had no daughter, to his brothers; if he had no brothers, to his nearest relatives. This particular incident also illustrates the importance of preserving tribal possessions: the daughters of Zelophehad were not allowed to marry outside the tribe of Manasseh, for this would mean transferral of the property to another tribe (Nm 36).<\/p>\n<p>How highly the Israelites valued their family’s inherited possessions may be gathered from Leviticus 25:25-28. If an individual sold his land for financial reasons, provision must be made for a relative to redeem it; if he had no near relative, he could still purchase it back at a later time, and even if he could not afford to do so, the land automatically reverted to him in the Year of Jubilee, when all debts were canceled (note also Lv 27:14-25).<\/p>\n<h5>In the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>Apart from the reference to levirate marriage in Matthew 22:23-33 (Mk 12:18-27; Lk 20:27-40), the NT has little to say about principles of property transferral during Roman times.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, the younger son in the family requested his share of the inheritance (Lk 15:12). One should also note that the elder son, who with false piety looked down on his brother’s behavior, had not protested when his brother asked for the inheritance; on the contrary, the elder brother too, without complaining, received his share—presumably a double portion.<\/p>\n<p>In another significant passage (Gal 4:1-2) Paul, seeking to illustrate a theological point, refers to secular practices. An heir, he tells us, is subject to guardians and managers during his childhood, up to the time he actually inherits. The point Paul wants to establish is clear enough, but the illustration does not coincide with what we know of Roman law and unfortunately scholars have been unable to identify the precise social custom in view. It may be that Paul was making reference, in general rather than strict legal terms, to some practice with which he and the Galatians were familiar.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheologicalAspect\">Theological Aspect<\/p>\n<h5>Canaan as Israel’s Inheritance<\/h5>\n<p>The conviction that God gave Palestine to the Israelites for their inheritance serves as a bridge between the historical and the theological data. The historical element lies in the obvious fact that the Promised Land, a physical entity, was certainly occupied by the Hebrews and distributed among their tribes. Theologically, however, the Scriptures speak of this occupation as a divine gift; in effect, even the method of distribution was based on the concept that the land belongs to God (Lv 25:23; see Ex 15:17; Jos 22:27; Ez 38:16; Jl 1:6).<\/p>\n<p>The theme goes back to Genesis 12:1-3. God, in choosing Abraham, instructed him to move to a new country and promised to make him a great and blessed nation (Heb 11:8). The significance of the land in this Abrahamic promise is made more explicit later, when we are told that God promised to give Canaan to Abraham’s descendants after four centuries of Egyptian bondage (Gn 15:12-21; see Acts 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>Since Canaan was occupied by wicked inhabitants, the land was to be taken by force; to inherit the land therefore really means <em>to take possession<\/em> of it. Israel must trust God, whose land it is, to give them the victory (Jos 1:1-9; 21:43-45; Jgs 7:2; Ps 44:1-3; Acts 13:19). Once they conquered the land, it was apportioned among the tribes according to their size (following the instructions in Nm 26:52-54). God further commanded the people to divide the land by lot (vv 55-56). Thus, from the initial promise to Abraham, to the actual apportionment of the land and even with reference to the future (Is 60:21; Ez 45:1-8; 47:13–48:29), the people were made fully aware that their inheritance lay in the hands of a sovereign Lord.<\/p>\n<h5>The Believer’s Inheritance<\/h5>\n<p>In the OT we find the concept of inheritance transferred from the purely physical to the spiritual. The tribe of Levi, which constituted the priestly clan, received no inheritance, because “the Lord is their inheritance” (Dt 18:1-2; see Nm 18:8-24). The Levites, in other words, received no land apportionment, but in their service to God they could begin to enjoy the fuller blessings to which the land inheritance pointed.<\/p>\n<p>That this truth could not be restricted to Levites is hinted at in Exodus 19:6, where the whole nation is called “a kingdom of priests” (see 1 Pt 2:9). Psalm 16 makes it clear that no one understood more clearly than David what those words entailed. Even if he were deprived of Israel’s physical inheritance, he had received by lot a more beautiful heritage, the Lord himself, in whose presence he found full joy and everlasting pleasures (Ps 16:5-6, 11; see also Pss 73:25-26; 142:5; Is 58:14; Lam 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>In later Judaism, during and after the intertestamental period, the figure was extended considerably. For example, the rabbis began to speak of the law as the inheritance of the faithful. Further, they might give the idea a negative turn, as when the wicked are said to inherit hell (cf. Jb 27:13). Neither of these figures is found in the NT.<\/p>\n<p>We also read in Jewish literature statements about inheriting the age to come, the kingdom, eternal life; these ideas occur frequently in the NT (Mt 19:29; 25:34; Lk 10:25; 18:18; 1 Cor 6:9-10; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; Ti 3:7; Jas 2:5). Such an inheritance, however, belongs only to those who are sanctified by God’s word (Acts 20:32; 26:18; Col 1:12; note also Jn 17:17; Col 3:23-24). These future blessings do not exclude the physical (Mt 5:5; note Ps 37:11, 29; Is 60:21; Rom 4:13; 2 Pt 3:13), but they certainly exclude human frailty, for God’s inheritance is imperishable (1 Cor 15:50). In short, our heritage is nothing less than full salvation (Heb 1:14; 11:7), which God carefully guards for us in heaven (1 Pt 1:4).<\/p>\n<p>Doubtless, the most significant feature in the NT is its emphasis that, as a result of the work of Christ, his people begin even <em>now<\/em> to receive the promised inheritance. The Gospel of John frequently stresses the present reality of eternal life, as does the Letter to the Hebrews (cf. 6:12-17 with 9:15 and 11:13, 39-40).<\/p>\n<p>Paul treats this whole matter thoroughly in Galatians 3:7–4:7. In response to the Judaizers, who claim that the Abrahamic inheritance is restricted to those who become Jews through circumcision, Paul argues vigorously that Abraham’s true children are those who believe, whether Jew or Gentile (3:7; see Acts 26:16-18; Eph 3:6). They become heirs of God’s promise, for they receive the Spirit (Gal 3:14). The principle of inheritance is promise, not the Law (v 18). Those who believe are brought into union with Christ (vv 27-29); but then they are not merely Abraham’s children but God’s (v 26), for Christ is the Son of God and God has determined to send the Spirit of his Son to believers so that they too may call God <em>Father<\/em> (Gal 4:4-7; see also Rom 8:15-16).<\/p>\n<p>Indeed, Christ himself as the Son is the true heir (Mt 21:38; Mk 12:7; Lk 20:14); he has inherited a name above every name (Phil 2:9; Heb 1:4) and has been appointed heir of all things (Heb 1:2; see Ps 2:7-8; Mt 28:18). But by his grace, all who become his through faith are counted joint heirs with him (Rom 8:17).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Inheritance<\/h5>\n<p>With a bold shift in the metaphor, the Scriptures speak of believers as God’s inheritance. In the beautiful “Song of Moses” the author speaks of God as the Israelites’ Father (Dt 32:6), who has taken special interest in their inheritance (v 8). Then we are told why God cares: “For the <span>Lord<\/span>’s portion is his people, Jacob his allotted inheritance” (Dt 32:9, <span>niv<\/span>). This theme becomes very prominent throughout the OT (e.g., Dt 9:26-29; 1 Kgs 8:51-53; Pss 28:9; 33:12; 74:2; Is 19:25; Jer 10:16; Zec 2:12). Elsewhere, Israel is spoken of as God’s special possession (e.g., Ex 19:5; Dt 7:6).<\/p>\n<p>In Ephesians 1:14 “the redemption of the possession” refers to the final salvation of believers, who are God’s treasure. Further, “we have obtained an inheritance” (Eph 1:11) may well be translated, “we have been made an inheritance,” that is, been “chosen as God’s portion,” a view supported by verse 18. No more fundamental idea than this can be found in Scripture, and its essence is expressed by the words of the One who sits on the throne: “He who conquers shall have this heritage, and I will be his God and he shall be my son” (Rv 21:7, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Lv 26:11-12; 2 Sm 7:14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adoption; Birthright; Firstborn; Heir.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>INHERITANCE<\/h3>\n<p>Legacy or bequest. Inheritance plays an unusually significant role in the Scriptures when it is used to convey theological truths. As we might expect, these theological applications reflect legal customs in force during OT and NT times.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LegalandHistoricalAspect\">Legal and Historical Aspect<\/p>\n<h5>The Patriarchs<\/h5>\n<p>We learn something of early-second-millennium <span>BC<\/span> practices from the patriarchal stories in Genesis. For example, the narrative indicates that the firstborn could normally expect to receive the birthright. Yet exceptions abound. Ishmael (Gn 16:15; 17:15-21), Esau (25:23), and Reuben (49:3-4) did not receive the birthright. Another item of special interest is Abraham’s suggestion that, in the absence of a son, his servant Eliezer might be regarded as the heir (15:2-5); scholars have found confirmation of this practice in Hurrian legal documents of the second millennium.<\/p>\n<h5>The Hebrew Nation<\/h5>\n<p>According to Deuteronomy 21:15-17, Hebrew firstborns were legally entitled to a double portion of the inheritance. Israelite law also made provision for widows through the practice of levirate marriage (Dt 25:5; see Gn 38:8; Ru 4:5).<\/p>\n<p>According to Numbers 27:1-11, the daughters of Zelophehad argued that they should receive the inheritance since their father had died without sons. Consequently, God decreed that if a man died without sons, the inheritance should be transferred to his daughter; if he had no daughter, to his brothers; if he had no brothers, to his nearest relatives. This particular incident also illustrates the importance of preserving tribal possessions: the daughters of Zelophehad were not allowed to marry outside the tribe of Manasseh, for this would mean transferral of the property to another tribe (Nm 36).<\/p>\n<p>How highly the Israelites valued their family’s inherited possessions may be gathered from Leviticus 25:25-28. If an individual sold his land for financial reasons, provision must be made for a relative to redeem it; if he had no near relative, he could still purchase it back at a later time, and even if he could not afford to do so, the land automatically reverted to him in the Year of Jubilee, when all debts were canceled (note also Lv 27:14-25).<\/p>\n<h5>In the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>Apart from the reference to levirate marriage in Matthew 22:23-33 (Mk 12:18-27; Lk 20:27-40), the NT has little to say about principles of property transferral during Roman times.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, the younger son in the family requested his share of the inheritance (Lk 15:12). One should also note that the elder son, who with false piety looked down on his brother’s behavior, had not protested when his brother asked for the inheritance; on the contrary, the elder brother too, without complaining, received his share—presumably a double portion.<\/p>\n<p>In another significant passage (Gal 4:1-2) Paul, seeking to illustrate a theological point, refers to secular practices. An heir, he tells us, is subject to guardians and managers during his childhood, up to the time he actually inherits. The point Paul wants to establish is clear enough, but the illustration does not coincide with what we know of Roman law and unfortunately scholars have been unable to identify the precise social custom in view. It may be that Paul was making reference, in general rather than strict legal terms, to some practice with which he and the Galatians were familiar.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheologicalAspect\">Theological Aspect<\/p>\n<h5>Canaan as Israel’s Inheritance<\/h5>\n<p>The conviction that God gave Palestine to the Israelites for their inheritance serves as a bridge between the historical and the theological data. The historical element lies in the obvious fact that the Promised Land, a physical entity, was certainly occupied by the Hebrews and distributed among their tribes. Theologically, however, the Scriptures speak of this occupation as a divine gift; in effect, even the method of distribution was based on the concept that the land belongs to God (Lv 25:23; see Ex 15:17; Jos 22:27; Ez 38:16; Jl 1:6).<\/p>\n<p>The theme goes back to Genesis 12:1-3. God, in choosing Abraham, instructed him to move to a new country and promised to make him a great and blessed nation (Heb 11:8). The significance of the land in this Abrahamic promise is made more explicit later, when we are told that God promised to give Canaan to Abraham’s descendants after four centuries of Egyptian bondage (Gn 15:12-21; see Acts 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>Since Canaan was occupied by wicked inhabitants, the land was to be taken by force; to inherit the land therefore really means <em>to take possession<\/em> of it. Israel must trust God, whose land it is, to give them the victory (Jos 1:1-9; 21:43-45; Jgs 7:2; Ps 44:1-3; Acts 13:19). Once they conquered the land, it was apportioned among the tribes according to their size (following the instructions in Nm 26:52-54). God further commanded the people to divide the land by lot (vv 55-56). Thus, from the initial promise to Abraham, to the actual apportionment of the land and even with reference to the future (Is 60:21; Ez 45:1-8; 47:13–48:29), the people were made fully aware that their inheritance lay in the hands of a sovereign Lord.<\/p>\n<h5>The Believer’s Inheritance<\/h5>\n<p>In the OT we find the concept of inheritance transferred from the purely physical to the spiritual. The tribe of Levi, which constituted the priestly clan, received no inheritance, because “the Lord is their inheritance” (Dt 18:1-2; see Nm 18:8-24). The Levites, in other words, received no land apportionment, but in their service to God they could begin to enjoy the fuller blessings to which the land inheritance pointed.<\/p>\n<p>That this truth could not be restricted to Levites is hinted at in Exodus 19:6, where the whole nation is called “a kingdom of priests” (see 1 Pt 2:9). Psalm 16 makes it clear that no one understood more clearly than David what those words entailed. Even if he were deprived of Israel’s physical inheritance, he had received by lot a more beautiful heritage, the Lord himself, in whose presence he found full joy and everlasting pleasures (Ps 16:5-6, 11; see also Pss 73:25-26; 142:5; Is 58:14; Lam 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>In later Judaism, during and after the intertestamental period, the figure was extended considerably. For example, the rabbis began to speak of the law as the inheritance of the faithful. Further, they might give the idea a negative turn, as when the wicked are said to inherit hell (cf. Jb 27:13). Neither of these figures is found in the NT.<\/p>\n<p>We also read in Jewish literature statements about inheriting the age to come, the kingdom, eternal life; these ideas occur frequently in the NT (Mt 19:29; 25:34; Lk 10:25; 18:18; 1 Cor 6:9-10; 15:50; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; Ti 3:7; Jas 2:5). Such an inheritance, however, belongs only to those who are sanctified by God’s word (Acts 20:32; 26:18; Col 1:12; note also Jn 17:17; Col 3:23-24). These future blessings do not exclude the physical (Mt 5:5; note Ps 37:11, 29; Is 60:21; Rom 4:13; 2 Pt 3:13), but they certainly exclude human frailty, for God’s inheritance is imperishable (1 Cor 15:50). In short, our heritage is nothing less than full salvation (Heb 1:14; 11:7), which God carefully guards for us in heaven (1 Pt 1:4).<\/p>\n<p>Doubtless, the most significant feature in the NT is its emphasis that, as a result of the work of Christ, his people begin even <em>now<\/em> to receive the promised inheritance. The Gospel of John frequently stresses the present reality of eternal life, as does the Letter to the Hebrews (cf. 6:12-17 with 9:15 and 11:13, 39-40).<\/p>\n<p>Paul treats this whole matter thoroughly in Galatians 3:7–4:7. In response to the Judaizers, who claim that the Abrahamic inheritance is restricted to those who become Jews through circumcision, Paul argues vigorously that Abraham’s true children are those who believe, whether Jew or Gentile (3:7; see Acts 26:16-18; Eph 3:6). They become heirs of God’s promise, for they receive the Spirit (Gal 3:14). The principle of inheritance is promise, not the Law (v 18). Those who believe are brought into union with Christ (vv 27-29); but then they are not merely Abraham’s children but God’s (v 26), for Christ is the Son of God and God has determined to send the Spirit of his Son to believers so that they too may call God <em>Father<\/em> (Gal 4:4-7; see also Rom 8:15-16).<\/p>\n<p>Indeed, Christ himself as the Son is the true heir (Mt 21:38; Mk 12:7; Lk 20:14); he has inherited a name above every name (Phil 2:9; Heb 1:4) and has been appointed heir of all things (Heb 1:2; see Ps 2:7-8; Mt 28:18). But by his grace, all who become his through faith are counted joint heirs with him (Rom 8:17).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Inheritance<\/h5>\n<p>With a bold shift in the metaphor, the Scriptures speak of believers as God’s inheritance. In the beautiful “Song of Moses” the author speaks of God as the Israelites’ Father (Dt 32:6), who has taken special interest in their inheritance (v 8). Then we are told why God cares: “For the <span>Lord<\/span>’s portion is his people, Jacob his allotted inheritance” (Dt 32:9, <span>niv<\/span>). This theme becomes very prominent throughout the OT (e.g., Dt 9:26-29; 1 Kgs 8:51-53; Pss 28:9; 33:12; 74:2; Is 19:25; Jer 10:16; Zec 2:12). Elsewhere, Israel is spoken of as God’s special possession (e.g., Ex 19:5; Dt 7:6).<\/p>\n<p>In Ephesians 1:14 “the redemption of the possession” refers to the final salvation of believers, who are God’s treasure. Further, “we have obtained an inheritance” (Eph 1:11) may well be translated, “we have been made an inheritance,” that is, been “chosen as God’s portion,” a view supported by verse 18. No more fundamental idea than this can be found in Scripture, and its essence is expressed by the words of the One who sits on the throne: “He who conquers shall have this heritage, and I will be his God and he shall be my son” (Rv 21:7, <span>rsv<\/span>; see Lv 26:11-12; 2 Sm 7:14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adoption; Birthright; Firstborn; Heir.<\/p>","summary_ro":"INHERITANCE Legacy or bequest. Inheritance plays an unusually significant role in the Scriptures when it is used to convey theological truths. As we might expect, these theological applications reflect legal customs in force during OT and NT times. Legal and Historical Aspect The Patriarchs We learn something of early-second-millennium BC practices from the patriarchal stories in Genesis. For example, the narrative indicates that the firstborn could normally expect to receive the birthright. ...","summary_en":"INHERITANCE Legacy or bequest. Inheritance plays an unusually significant role in the Scriptures when it is used to convey theological truths. As we might expect, these theological applications reflect legal customs in force during OT and NT times. Legal and Historical Aspect The Patriarchs We learn something of early-second-millennium BC practices from the patriarchal stories in Genesis. For example, the narrative indicates that the firstborn could normally expect to receive the birthright. ...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33375,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ruth (Person)","title_en":"Ruth (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>RUTH (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>Moabitess and the widow of Mahlon, the son of Naomi and Elimelech, who were Ephrathites from Bethlehem living in Moab because of a severe famine in Judah. After the death of Elimelech and Naomi’s two sons, Naomi returned to Bethlehem with her daughter-in-law Ruth during the time of the barley harvest (Ru 1:4-22). While gleaning in the barley fields of Boaz, Ruth found favor in his eyes (2:2-22). She later married Boaz, when he, serving as nearest kin to the childless Naomi, purchased Naomi’s estate to keep it within the family (4:5-13). Ruth is mentioned in Matthew’s genealogy of Christ as the mother of Obed and the great-grandmother of David (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Ruth, Book of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RUTH (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>Moabitess and the widow of Mahlon, the son of Naomi and Elimelech, who were Ephrathites from Bethlehem living in Moab because of a severe famine in Judah. After the death of Elimelech and Naomi’s two sons, Naomi returned to Bethlehem with her daughter-in-law Ruth during the time of the barley harvest (Ru 1:4-22). While gleaning in the barley fields of Boaz, Ruth found favor in his eyes (2:2-22). She later married Boaz, when he, serving as nearest kin to the childless Naomi, purchased Naomi’s estate to keep it within the family (4:5-13). Ruth is mentioned in Matthew’s genealogy of Christ as the mother of Obed and the great-grandmother of David (Mt 1:5).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Ruth, Book of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"RUTH (Person) Moabitess and the widow of Mahlon, the son of Naomi and Elimelech, who were Ephrathites from Bethlehem living in Moab because of a severe famine in Judah. After the death of Elimelech and Naomi’s two sons, Naomi returned to Bethlehem with her daughter-in-law Ruth during the time of the barley harvest (Ru 1:4-22). While gleaning in the barley fields of Boaz, Ruth found favor in his eyes (2:2-22). She later married Boaz, when he, serving as nearest kin to the childless Naomi, purc...","summary_en":"RUTH (Person) Moabitess and the widow of Mahlon, the son of Naomi and Elimelech, who were Ephrathites from Bethlehem living in Moab because of a severe famine in Judah. After the death of Elimelech and Naomi’s two sons, Naomi returned to Bethlehem with her daughter-in-law Ruth during the time of the barley harvest (Ru 1:4-22). While gleaning in the barley fields of Boaz, Ruth found favor in his eyes (2:2-22). She later married Boaz, when he, serving as nearest kin to the childless Naomi, purc...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33391,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Ruth","title_en":"Book of Ruth","content_ro":"<h3>RUTH, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p>• Message<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>The author of the book is unknown. The question of authorship has particular connection with the date of writing, and a few clues provide at least an educated guess. The book must have been written sometime after the beginning of David’s reign. The information in Ruth 4:18-22, which pertains to the historical significance of Ruth as David’s great-grandmother, bears this out. Since foreign marriages were not approved in the book of Ruth, it scarcely could have been written during the period in which Solomon began his policy of foreign marriages. Also, David’s close friendship with Moab might have prompted someone in his kingdom to write the book, thus presenting objective rationale for David’s actions (see 1 Sm 22:3-5). Consequently, the author may have been someone close to David, possibly Samuel, Nathan, or Abiathar.<\/p>\n<p>The time of the narrative is indicated by the opening statement: “In the days when the judges ruled. . . .” The dates of the judges probably comprise a period of about 300 years, beginning with the judgeship of Othniel and concluding with that of Samson, though Samuel also served as a judge. If the genealogical information is complete in Ruth 4:18-22, the events took place during the life of David’s great-grandfather and mark the birth of his grandfather. Allowing a 35-year generation span, the events would have taken place somewhere about the turn of the 11th century <span>BC<\/span>, or about 100 years before David’s birth.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The book’s purpose is closely related to its date of composition. Assuming an early date, that is, one close to David’s lifetime, its principal thrust must be the authentication of the Davidic line. The book may be considered as a justification for including the godly Moabitess in the nation of Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Introduction (1:1-5)<\/h5>\n<p>Driven by famine, Elimelech, with his wife, Naomi, and his two sons, Mahlon and Chilion, cross the Jordan to stay for a period of time in Moab, where there is sufficient provision. The two sons, after marrying Moabite women, die, and their father dies as well. Naomi is left a widow, with two foreign daughters-in-law.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Return to Bethlehem (1:6-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Hearing reports from Bethlehem that the famine has ended, Naomi makes preparations to return. Both of her daughters-in-law, Orpah and Ruth, accompany her for at least a portion of the journey. Probably thinking of the problems they might encounter as foreigners in Judah, Naomi strongly urges the girls to stay in their own land. Both of the young widows refuse, but Naomi presents the facts. First, she is not pregnant, so the chance of a younger brother fulfilling the levirate responsibility is not imminent. Second, she has no prospects of remarriage and consequently no prospect of further children. Then she also notes that even if the first two conditions were met immediately, the possibility of their waiting was impossible. Orpah is persuaded and kisses her mother-in-law good-bye.<\/p>\n<p>But Ruth “clung to her” (1:18). The verb, having the connotation of being glued to something, is the same verb used of marriage (Gn 2:24). Ruth demonstrated her serious intentions by making five commitments (Ru 1:16-17). In essence, Ruth renounced her former life in order to gain a life that she considered of greater value. She decided to follow the God of Israel and his laws. Ruth’s appeal to the God of Israel was more than equal to Naomi’s pleas, and the two of them returned together.<\/p>\n<p>Their arrival in Bethlehem was traumatic for Naomi. Having left Bethlehem with a husband and two sons, she returned empty. She told her friends to call her “Mara” (bitter). But she had returned at a propitious time, the beginning of the harvest season.<\/p>\n<h5>Reaping in the Fields of Boaz (2:1-23)<\/h5>\n<p>The first verse of the chapter provides the setting for the narrative that follows by introducing Boaz, a wealthy relative of Elimelech.<\/p>\n<p>In the second verse, Ruth volunteered to glean the fields by following the reapers and picking up the small amounts left behind. Gleaners were also permitted to harvest the grain in the corners of the fields—a provision for the poor contained in the law (Lv 19:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Ruth happened to come to the field of Boaz. When he visited this field, he noticed Ruth, inquired about her, and learned her identity. His overseer reported that she had industriously worked the fields from early morning until that time. Boaz, attracted to her because of her loyalty and concern for Naomi, graciously made additional provisions for her. She was given a favored position in reaping, directly behind the main body of reapers. Further, she was to receive water that had been drawn for her by the young men—an unorthodox arrangement.<\/p>\n<p>Ruth, falling before Boaz in a gesture of great humility and respect, asked why she—as a foreigner—should receive such favor. Boaz gave two reasons: her kindness to her mother-in-law, and her spiritual insight, which led her to seek after Israel’s God, “under whose wings you have come to take refuge” (Ru 2:12, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>She was also given a place at the reapers’ table and, upon Boaz’s orders, returned to the fields, this time to reap from the unharvested grain. At the end of the day she returned home to Naomi and told her of the day’s events. Naomi informed Ruth that Boaz had the right of redemption (see discussion below). Ruth returned to his fields until the end of the harvest season.<\/p>\n<h5>Relying upon the Kinsman (3:1-18)<\/h5>\n<p>Naomi advised Ruth to approach Boaz as a <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span><em>,<\/em> or kinsman-redeemer. The plan suggested by Naomi seems peculiar, yet some thoughts may give a certain coloring to it. (1) Naomi seems to have believed that Boaz was the nearest kinsman, being ignorant of the yet nearer one (3:12). Consequently, according to Israelite law (Dt 25:5ff.), it would be the duty of Boaz to marry Ruth to produce offspring, since her husband died. (2) The general presentation of Naomi’s character in this book is that of a God-fearing woman. It is certain that, however curious in its external form, there can be nothing counseled here that is repugnant to God’s law or shocking to a virtuous man such as Boaz. Otherwise, Naomi would have been frustrating her own purpose.<\/p>\n<p>Boaz’s response to Ruth’s actions demonstrated his gentlemanly concerns for her. He explained to her that he was not the nearest kinsman but promised that he would take care of the necessary procedures the next day. Protecting her reputation, Boaz sent her home before daylight. Naomi predicted that Boaz would settle the matter that very day.<\/p>\n<h5>Redeeming the Inheritance (4:1-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Boaz went to the place of business, the city gate. The city gate area comprised the forum where the public affairs of the city were discussed. Boaz indicated that he wished to discuss a matter of business with the nearer kinsman. Ten of the city elders acted as witnesses. The first matter at hand was to deal with the issue of property. Boaz asked this nearer kinsman if he was willing to acquire property for Naomi. This is stated in the traditional stipulation: “Your purchase of the land from Naomi also requires that you marry Ruth, the Moabite widow” (4:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). The nearer kinsman was unwilling to marry Ruth because this would inevitably cost him some financial loss, since he would have to divide his own property with any son of his born to Ruth. Thus he relinquished his rights by the custom of taking off his shoe. (The shoe was symbolic of the land rights that belonged to the inheritance.) So Boaz took the part of being the kinsman-redeemer. The marriage of Boaz and Ruth produced a son who, under Israel’s laws, was reckoned as Naomi’s child and heir.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Message\">Message<\/p>\n<p>First, the book of Ruth traces the lineage of Ruth to David. The completion of that line is in Matthew 1 and finds its fulfillment in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A second teaching is the beauty of God’s grace. A foreigner, even a Moabitess, can be linked with Israel’s blessing.<\/p>\n<p>Theologically, the concept of kinsman-redeemer as a type of Messiah is clearly evident. He must be a blood relative, have the ability to purchase, be willing to buy the inheritance, and be willing to marry the widow of the deceased kinsman.<\/p>\n<p>And finally, the love that Ruth showed to Naomi provides a pattern of devotion. The women of Bethlehem told Naomi, “Your daughter-in-law . . . loves you so much and [is] better to you than seven sons!” (4:15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RUTH, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p>• Message<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>The author of the book is unknown. The question of authorship has particular connection with the date of writing, and a few clues provide at least an educated guess. The book must have been written sometime after the beginning of David’s reign. The information in Ruth 4:18-22, which pertains to the historical significance of Ruth as David’s great-grandmother, bears this out. Since foreign marriages were not approved in the book of Ruth, it scarcely could have been written during the period in which Solomon began his policy of foreign marriages. Also, David’s close friendship with Moab might have prompted someone in his kingdom to write the book, thus presenting objective rationale for David’s actions (see 1 Sm 22:3-5). Consequently, the author may have been someone close to David, possibly Samuel, Nathan, or Abiathar.<\/p>\n<p>The time of the narrative is indicated by the opening statement: “In the days when the judges ruled. . . .” The dates of the judges probably comprise a period of about 300 years, beginning with the judgeship of Othniel and concluding with that of Samson, though Samuel also served as a judge. If the genealogical information is complete in Ruth 4:18-22, the events took place during the life of David’s great-grandfather and mark the birth of his grandfather. Allowing a 35-year generation span, the events would have taken place somewhere about the turn of the 11th century <span>BC<\/span>, or about 100 years before David’s birth.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The book’s purpose is closely related to its date of composition. Assuming an early date, that is, one close to David’s lifetime, its principal thrust must be the authentication of the Davidic line. The book may be considered as a justification for including the godly Moabitess in the nation of Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Introduction (1:1-5)<\/h5>\n<p>Driven by famine, Elimelech, with his wife, Naomi, and his two sons, Mahlon and Chilion, cross the Jordan to stay for a period of time in Moab, where there is sufficient provision. The two sons, after marrying Moabite women, die, and their father dies as well. Naomi is left a widow, with two foreign daughters-in-law.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Return to Bethlehem (1:6-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Hearing reports from Bethlehem that the famine has ended, Naomi makes preparations to return. Both of her daughters-in-law, Orpah and Ruth, accompany her for at least a portion of the journey. Probably thinking of the problems they might encounter as foreigners in Judah, Naomi strongly urges the girls to stay in their own land. Both of the young widows refuse, but Naomi presents the facts. First, she is not pregnant, so the chance of a younger brother fulfilling the levirate responsibility is not imminent. Second, she has no prospects of remarriage and consequently no prospect of further children. Then she also notes that even if the first two conditions were met immediately, the possibility of their waiting was impossible. Orpah is persuaded and kisses her mother-in-law good-bye.<\/p>\n<p>But Ruth “clung to her” (1:18). The verb, having the connotation of being glued to something, is the same verb used of marriage (Gn 2:24). Ruth demonstrated her serious intentions by making five commitments (Ru 1:16-17). In essence, Ruth renounced her former life in order to gain a life that she considered of greater value. She decided to follow the God of Israel and his laws. Ruth’s appeal to the God of Israel was more than equal to Naomi’s pleas, and the two of them returned together.<\/p>\n<p>Their arrival in Bethlehem was traumatic for Naomi. Having left Bethlehem with a husband and two sons, she returned empty. She told her friends to call her “Mara” (bitter). But she had returned at a propitious time, the beginning of the harvest season.<\/p>\n<h5>Reaping in the Fields of Boaz (2:1-23)<\/h5>\n<p>The first verse of the chapter provides the setting for the narrative that follows by introducing Boaz, a wealthy relative of Elimelech.<\/p>\n<p>In the second verse, Ruth volunteered to glean the fields by following the reapers and picking up the small amounts left behind. Gleaners were also permitted to harvest the grain in the corners of the fields—a provision for the poor contained in the law (Lv 19:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Ruth happened to come to the field of Boaz. When he visited this field, he noticed Ruth, inquired about her, and learned her identity. His overseer reported that she had industriously worked the fields from early morning until that time. Boaz, attracted to her because of her loyalty and concern for Naomi, graciously made additional provisions for her. She was given a favored position in reaping, directly behind the main body of reapers. Further, she was to receive water that had been drawn for her by the young men—an unorthodox arrangement.<\/p>\n<p>Ruth, falling before Boaz in a gesture of great humility and respect, asked why she—as a foreigner—should receive such favor. Boaz gave two reasons: her kindness to her mother-in-law, and her spiritual insight, which led her to seek after Israel’s God, “under whose wings you have come to take refuge” (Ru 2:12, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>She was also given a place at the reapers’ table and, upon Boaz’s orders, returned to the fields, this time to reap from the unharvested grain. At the end of the day she returned home to Naomi and told her of the day’s events. Naomi informed Ruth that Boaz had the right of redemption (see discussion below). Ruth returned to his fields until the end of the harvest season.<\/p>\n<h5>Relying upon the Kinsman (3:1-18)<\/h5>\n<p>Naomi advised Ruth to approach Boaz as a <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span><em>,<\/em> or kinsman-redeemer. The plan suggested by Naomi seems peculiar, yet some thoughts may give a certain coloring to it. (1) Naomi seems to have believed that Boaz was the nearest kinsman, being ignorant of the yet nearer one (3:12). Consequently, according to Israelite law (Dt 25:5ff.), it would be the duty of Boaz to marry Ruth to produce offspring, since her husband died. (2) The general presentation of Naomi’s character in this book is that of a God-fearing woman. It is certain that, however curious in its external form, there can be nothing counseled here that is repugnant to God’s law or shocking to a virtuous man such as Boaz. Otherwise, Naomi would have been frustrating her own purpose.<\/p>\n<p>Boaz’s response to Ruth’s actions demonstrated his gentlemanly concerns for her. He explained to her that he was not the nearest kinsman but promised that he would take care of the necessary procedures the next day. Protecting her reputation, Boaz sent her home before daylight. Naomi predicted that Boaz would settle the matter that very day.<\/p>\n<h5>Redeeming the Inheritance (4:1-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Boaz went to the place of business, the city gate. The city gate area comprised the forum where the public affairs of the city were discussed. Boaz indicated that he wished to discuss a matter of business with the nearer kinsman. Ten of the city elders acted as witnesses. The first matter at hand was to deal with the issue of property. Boaz asked this nearer kinsman if he was willing to acquire property for Naomi. This is stated in the traditional stipulation: “Your purchase of the land from Naomi also requires that you marry Ruth, the Moabite widow” (4:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). The nearer kinsman was unwilling to marry Ruth because this would inevitably cost him some financial loss, since he would have to divide his own property with any son of his born to Ruth. Thus he relinquished his rights by the custom of taking off his shoe. (The shoe was symbolic of the land rights that belonged to the inheritance.) So Boaz took the part of being the kinsman-redeemer. The marriage of Boaz and Ruth produced a son who, under Israel’s laws, was reckoned as Naomi’s child and heir.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Message\">Message<\/p>\n<p>First, the book of Ruth traces the lineage of Ruth to David. The completion of that line is in Matthew 1 and finds its fulfillment in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A second teaching is the beauty of God’s grace. A foreigner, even a Moabitess, can be linked with Israel’s blessing.<\/p>\n<p>Theologically, the concept of kinsman-redeemer as a type of Messiah is clearly evident. He must be a blood relative, have the ability to purchase, be willing to buy the inheritance, and be willing to marry the widow of the deceased kinsman.<\/p>\n<p>And finally, the love that Ruth showed to Naomi provides a pattern of devotion. The women of Bethlehem told Naomi, “Your daughter-in-law . . . loves you so much and [is] better to you than seven sons!” (4:15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"RUTH, Book of Preview • Author and Date • Purpose • Content • Message Author and Date The author of the book is unknown. The question of authorship has particular connection with the date of writing, and a few clues provide at least an educated guess. The book must have been written sometime after the beginning of David’s reign. The information in Ruth 4:18-22, which pertains to the historical significance of Ruth as David’s great-grandmother, bears this out. Since foreign marriages were not ...","summary_en":"RUTH, Book of Preview • Author and Date • Purpose • Content • Message Author and Date The author of the book is unknown. The question of authorship has particular connection with the date of writing, and a few clues provide at least an educated guess. The book must have been written sometime after the beginning of David’s reign. The information in Ruth 4:18-22, which pertains to the historical significance of Ruth as David’s great-grandmother, bears this out. Since foreign marriages were not ...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":46020,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:5","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:5<\/strong> <em>your purchase . . . requires that you marry Ruth<\/em> (literally <em>on the day you purchase . . . you acquire Ruth<\/em>): In the Hebrew manuscripts that we have, the body of this verse reads <em>I acquire,<\/em> but a scribal correction in the margin reads <em>you acquire,<\/em> a difference of one letter. (The scribe believed <em>you acquire<\/em> was the original reading and that the body of the text contained an error.) Some interpreters believe the body of the Hebrew text (<em>I acquire<\/em>) is the original reading of the text, indicating that the marriage between Boaz and Ruth was already set to occur (see study note on 3:11). Most translators, however, believe that the marginal correction (<em>you acquire<\/em>) represents the original reading of the text because: (1) The scribe who made the marginal correction believed that <em>you acquire<\/em> was the original reading; (2) most ancient translations of Ruth, which predate our oldest copies of the Hebrew text, also read <em>you acquire<\/em>; and (3) it is easy to envision that an earlier Hebrew scribe (working before our earliest manuscript copies) substituted <em>I acquire<\/em>—as it appears in 4:10—in place of <em>you acquire<\/em>. • <em>That way she can have children who will carry on her husband’s name and keep the land in the family:<\/em> This sentence draws heavily on Deut 25:7. Boaz connected the duties of a family redeemer (see study notes on Ruth 2:20; Lev 25:25) with the duties of a brother-in-law (Latin <em>levir<\/em>) to provide an heir for a deceased brother (see Deut 25:5-10 for a description of <em>levirate marriage;<\/em> cp. Gen 38). There is no precise precedent for Boaz’s legal maneuver. The duty of the <em>levir<\/em> as stated in Deut 25:5-10 was not binding in this situation (neither Boaz nor the other kinsman was Elimelech’s brother, and Ruth was not Elimelech’s widow). Boaz was apparently using the spirit of the law concerning the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> (family redeemer) to establish a moral, if not a legal, obligation to serve as <em>levir<\/em> and provide the deceased with an heir to inherit the land (see study note on Lev 25:25). The concepts of land ownership and provision for an heir were intimately connected in ancient Israel (cp. Num 27:1-11). Because Naomi was beyond childbearing age, Ruth, the widow of Elimelech’s son, would be the mother for such an heir. This maneuver apparently surprised the other kinsman (Ruth 4:6), but it is clear from what follows that Boaz’s argument, while perhaps novel, was accepted as valid.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:5<\/strong> <em>your purchase . . . requires that you marry Ruth<\/em> (literally <em>on the day you purchase . . . you acquire Ruth<\/em>): In the Hebrew manuscripts that we have, the body of this verse reads <em>I acquire,<\/em> but a scribal correction in the margin reads <em>you acquire,<\/em> a difference of one letter. (The scribe believed <em>you acquire<\/em> was the original reading and that the body of the text contained an error.) Some interpreters believe the body of the Hebrew text (<em>I acquire<\/em>) is the original reading of the text, indicating that the marriage between Boaz and Ruth was already set to occur (see study note on 3:11). Most translators, however, believe that the marginal correction (<em>you acquire<\/em>) represents the original reading of the text because: (1) The scribe who made the marginal correction believed that <em>you acquire<\/em> was the original reading; (2) most ancient translations of Ruth, which predate our oldest copies of the Hebrew text, also read <em>you acquire<\/em>; and (3) it is easy to envision that an earlier Hebrew scribe (working before our earliest manuscript copies) substituted <em>I acquire<\/em>—as it appears in 4:10—in place of <em>you acquire<\/em>. • <em>That way she can have children who will carry on her husband’s name and keep the land in the family:<\/em> This sentence draws heavily on Deut 25:7. Boaz connected the duties of a family redeemer (see study notes on Ruth 2:20; Lev 25:25) with the duties of a brother-in-law (Latin <em>levir<\/em>) to provide an heir for a deceased brother (see Deut 25:5-10 for a description of <em>levirate marriage;<\/em> cp. Gen 38). There is no precise precedent for Boaz’s legal maneuver. The duty of the <em>levir<\/em> as stated in Deut 25:5-10 was not binding in this situation (neither Boaz nor the other kinsman was Elimelech’s brother, and Ruth was not Elimelech’s widow). Boaz was apparently using the spirit of the law concerning the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> (family redeemer) to establish a moral, if not a legal, obligation to serve as <em>levir<\/em> and provide the deceased with an heir to inherit the land (see study note on Lev 25:25). The concepts of land ownership and provision for an heir were intimately connected in ancient Israel (cp. Num 27:1-11). Because Naomi was beyond childbearing age, Ruth, the widow of Elimelech’s son, would be the mother for such an heir. This maneuver apparently surprised the other kinsman (Ruth 4:6), but it is clear from what follows that Boaz’s argument, while perhaps novel, was accepted as valid.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:5 your purchase . . . requires that you marry Ruth (literally on the day you purchase . . . you acquire Ruth): In the Hebrew manuscripts that we have, the body of this verse reads I acquire, but a scribal correction in the margin reads you acquire, a difference of one letter. (The scribe believed you acquire was the original reading and that the body of the text contained an error.) Some interpreters believe the body of the Hebrew text (I acquire) is the original reading of the text, indica...","summary_en":"4:5 your purchase . . . requires that you marry Ruth (literally on the day you purchase . . . you acquire Ruth): In the Hebrew manuscripts that we have, the body of this verse reads I acquire, but a scribal correction in the margin reads you acquire, a difference of one letter. (The scribe believed you acquire was the original reading and that the body of the text contained an error.) Some interpreters believe the body of the Hebrew text (I acquire) is the original reading of the text, indica...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73646,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:5","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:5<\/strong> <em>your purchase . . . requires that you marry Ruth<\/em> (literally <em>on the day you purchase . . . you acquire Ruth<\/em>): In the Hebrew manuscripts that we have, the body of this verse reads <em>I acquire,<\/em> but a scribal correction in the margin reads <em>you acquire,<\/em> a difference of one letter. (The scribe believed <em>you acquire<\/em> was the original reading and that the body of the text contained an error.) Some interpreters believe the body of the Hebrew text (<em>I acquire<\/em>) is the original reading of the text, indicating that the marriage between Boaz and Ruth was already set to occur (see study note on 3:11). Most translators, however, believe that the marginal correction (<em>you acquire<\/em>) represents the original reading of the text because: (1) The scribe who made the marginal correction believed that <em>you acquire<\/em> was the original reading; (2) most ancient translations of Ruth, which predate our oldest copies of the Hebrew text, also read <em>you acquire<\/em>; and (3) it is easy to envision that an earlier Hebrew scribe (working before our earliest manuscript copies) substituted <em>I acquire<\/em>—as it appears in 4:10—in place of <em>you acquire<\/em>. • <em>That way she can have children who will carry on her husband’s name and keep the land in the family:<\/em> This sentence draws heavily on Deut 25:7. Boaz connected the duties of a family redeemer (see study notes on Ruth 2:20; Lev 25:25) with the duties of a brother-in-law (Latin <em>levir<\/em>) to provide an heir for a deceased brother (see Deut 25:5-10 for a description of <em>levirate marriage;<\/em> cp. Gen 38). There is no precise precedent for Boaz’s legal maneuver. The duty of the <em>levir<\/em> as stated in Deut 25:5-10 was not binding in this situation (neither Boaz nor the other kinsman was Elimelech’s brother, and Ruth was not Elimelech’s widow). Boaz was apparently using the spirit of the law concerning the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> (family redeemer) to establish a moral, if not a legal, obligation to serve as <em>levir<\/em> and provide the deceased with an heir to inherit the land (see study note on Lev 25:25). The concepts of land ownership and provision for an heir were intimately connected in ancient Israel (cp. Num 27:1-11). Because Naomi was beyond childbearing age, Ruth, the widow of Elimelech’s son, would be the mother for such an heir. This maneuver apparently surprised the other kinsman (Ruth 4:6), but it is clear from what follows that Boaz’s argument, while perhaps novel, was accepted as valid.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:5<\/strong> <em>your purchase . . . requires that you marry Ruth<\/em> (literally <em>on the day you purchase . . . you acquire Ruth<\/em>): In the Hebrew manuscripts that we have, the body of this verse reads <em>I acquire,<\/em> but a scribal correction in the margin reads <em>you acquire,<\/em> a difference of one letter. (The scribe believed <em>you acquire<\/em> was the original reading and that the body of the text contained an error.) Some interpreters believe the body of the Hebrew text (<em>I acquire<\/em>) is the original reading of the text, indicating that the marriage between Boaz and Ruth was already set to occur (see study note on 3:11). Most translators, however, believe that the marginal correction (<em>you acquire<\/em>) represents the original reading of the text because: (1) The scribe who made the marginal correction believed that <em>you acquire<\/em> was the original reading; (2) most ancient translations of Ruth, which predate our oldest copies of the Hebrew text, also read <em>you acquire<\/em>; and (3) it is easy to envision that an earlier Hebrew scribe (working before our earliest manuscript copies) substituted <em>I acquire<\/em>—as it appears in 4:10—in place of <em>you acquire<\/em>. • <em>That way she can have children who will carry on her husband’s name and keep the land in the family:<\/em> This sentence draws heavily on Deut 25:7. Boaz connected the duties of a family redeemer (see study notes on Ruth 2:20; Lev 25:25) with the duties of a brother-in-law (Latin <em>levir<\/em>) to provide an heir for a deceased brother (see Deut 25:5-10 for a description of <em>levirate marriage;<\/em> cp. Gen 38). There is no precise precedent for Boaz’s legal maneuver. The duty of the <em>levir<\/em> as stated in Deut 25:5-10 was not binding in this situation (neither Boaz nor the other kinsman was Elimelech’s brother, and Ruth was not Elimelech’s widow). Boaz was apparently using the spirit of the law concerning the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> (family redeemer) to establish a moral, if not a legal, obligation to serve as <em>levir<\/em> and provide the deceased with an heir to inherit the land (see study note on Lev 25:25). The concepts of land ownership and provision for an heir were intimately connected in ancient Israel (cp. Num 27:1-11). Because Naomi was beyond childbearing age, Ruth, the widow of Elimelech’s son, would be the mother for such an heir. This maneuver apparently surprised the other kinsman (Ruth 4:6), but it is clear from what follows that Boaz’s argument, while perhaps novel, was accepted as valid.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:5 your purchase . . . requires that you marry Ruth (literally on the day you purchase . . . you acquire Ruth): In the Hebrew manuscripts that we have, the body of this verse reads I acquire, but a scribal correction in the margin reads you acquire, a difference of one letter. (The scribe believed you acquire was the original reading and that the body of the text contained an error.) Some interpreters believe the body of the Hebrew text (I acquire) is the original reading of the text, indica...","summary_en":"4:5 your purchase . . . requires that you marry Ruth (literally on the day you purchase . . . you acquire Ruth): In the Hebrew manuscripts that we have, the body of this verse reads I acquire, but a scribal correction in the margin reads you acquire, a difference of one letter. (The scribe believed you acquire was the original reading and that the body of the text contained an error.) Some interpreters believe the body of the Hebrew text (I acquire) is the original reading of the text, indica...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101272,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:5","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:5<\/strong> <em>your purchase . . . requires that you marry Ruth<\/em> (literally <em>on the day you purchase . . . you acquire Ruth<\/em>): In the Hebrew manuscripts that we have, the body of this verse reads <em>I acquire,<\/em> but a scribal correction in the margin reads <em>you acquire,<\/em> a difference of one letter. (The scribe believed <em>you acquire<\/em> was the original reading and that the body of the text contained an error.) Some interpreters believe the body of the Hebrew text (<em>I acquire<\/em>) is the original reading of the text, indicating that the marriage between Boaz and Ruth was already set to occur (see study note on 3:11). Most translators, however, believe that the marginal correction (<em>you acquire<\/em>) represents the original reading of the text because: (1) The scribe who made the marginal correction believed that <em>you acquire<\/em> was the original reading; (2) most ancient translations of Ruth, which predate our oldest copies of the Hebrew text, also read <em>you acquire<\/em>; and (3) it is easy to envision that an earlier Hebrew scribe (working before our earliest manuscript copies) substituted <em>I acquire<\/em>—as it appears in 4:10—in place of <em>you acquire<\/em>. • <em>That way she can have children who will carry on her husband’s name and keep the land in the family:<\/em> This sentence draws heavily on Deut 25:7. Boaz connected the duties of a family redeemer (see study notes on Ruth 2:20; Lev 25:25) with the duties of a brother-in-law (Latin <em>levir<\/em>) to provide an heir for a deceased brother (see Deut 25:5-10 for a description of <em>levirate marriage;<\/em> cp. Gen 38). There is no precise precedent for Boaz’s legal maneuver. The duty of the <em>levir<\/em> as stated in Deut 25:5-10 was not binding in this situation (neither Boaz nor the other kinsman was Elimelech’s brother, and Ruth was not Elimelech’s widow). Boaz was apparently using the spirit of the law concerning the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> (family redeemer) to establish a moral, if not a legal, obligation to serve as <em>levir<\/em> and provide the deceased with an heir to inherit the land (see study note on Lev 25:25). The concepts of land ownership and provision for an heir were intimately connected in ancient Israel (cp. Num 27:1-11). Because Naomi was beyond childbearing age, Ruth, the widow of Elimelech’s son, would be the mother for such an heir. This maneuver apparently surprised the other kinsman (Ruth 4:6), but it is clear from what follows that Boaz’s argument, while perhaps novel, was accepted as valid.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:5<\/strong> <em>your purchase . . . requires that you marry Ruth<\/em> (literally <em>on the day you purchase . . . you acquire Ruth<\/em>): In the Hebrew manuscripts that we have, the body of this verse reads <em>I acquire,<\/em> but a scribal correction in the margin reads <em>you acquire,<\/em> a difference of one letter. (The scribe believed <em>you acquire<\/em> was the original reading and that the body of the text contained an error.) Some interpreters believe the body of the Hebrew text (<em>I acquire<\/em>) is the original reading of the text, indicating that the marriage between Boaz and Ruth was already set to occur (see study note on 3:11). Most translators, however, believe that the marginal correction (<em>you acquire<\/em>) represents the original reading of the text because: (1) The scribe who made the marginal correction believed that <em>you acquire<\/em> was the original reading; (2) most ancient translations of Ruth, which predate our oldest copies of the Hebrew text, also read <em>you acquire<\/em>; and (3) it is easy to envision that an earlier Hebrew scribe (working before our earliest manuscript copies) substituted <em>I acquire<\/em>—as it appears in 4:10—in place of <em>you acquire<\/em>. • <em>That way she can have children who will carry on her husband’s name and keep the land in the family:<\/em> This sentence draws heavily on Deut 25:7. Boaz connected the duties of a family redeemer (see study notes on Ruth 2:20; Lev 25:25) with the duties of a brother-in-law (Latin <em>levir<\/em>) to provide an heir for a deceased brother (see Deut 25:5-10 for a description of <em>levirate marriage;<\/em> cp. Gen 38). There is no precise precedent for Boaz’s legal maneuver. The duty of the <em>levir<\/em> as stated in Deut 25:5-10 was not binding in this situation (neither Boaz nor the other kinsman was Elimelech’s brother, and Ruth was not Elimelech’s widow). Boaz was apparently using the spirit of the law concerning the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> (family redeemer) to establish a moral, if not a legal, obligation to serve as <em>levir<\/em> and provide the deceased with an heir to inherit the land (see study note on Lev 25:25). The concepts of land ownership and provision for an heir were intimately connected in ancient Israel (cp. Num 27:1-11). Because Naomi was beyond childbearing age, Ruth, the widow of Elimelech’s son, would be the mother for such an heir. This maneuver apparently surprised the other kinsman (Ruth 4:6), but it is clear from what follows that Boaz’s argument, while perhaps novel, was accepted as valid.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:5 your purchase . . . requires that you marry Ruth (literally on the day you purchase . . . you acquire Ruth): In the Hebrew manuscripts that we have, the body of this verse reads I acquire, but a scribal correction in the margin reads you acquire, a difference of one letter. (The scribe believed you acquire was the original reading and that the body of the text contained an error.) Some interpreters believe the body of the Hebrew text (I acquire) is the original reading of the text, indica...","summary_en":"4:5 your purchase . . . requires that you marry Ruth (literally on the day you purchase . . . you acquire Ruth): In the Hebrew manuscripts that we have, the body of this verse reads I acquire, but a scribal correction in the margin reads you acquire, a difference of one letter. (The scribe believed you acquire was the original reading and that the body of the text contained an error.) Some interpreters believe the body of the Hebrew text (I acquire) is the original reading of the text, indica...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128898,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:5","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:5<\/strong> <em>your purchase . . . requires that you marry Ruth<\/em> (literally <em>on the day you purchase . . . you acquire Ruth<\/em>): In the Hebrew manuscripts that we have, the body of this verse reads <em>I acquire,<\/em> but a scribal correction in the margin reads <em>you acquire,<\/em> a difference of one letter. (The scribe believed <em>you acquire<\/em> was the original reading and that the body of the text contained an error.) Some interpreters believe the body of the Hebrew text (<em>I acquire<\/em>) is the original reading of the text, indicating that the marriage between Boaz and Ruth was already set to occur (see study note on 3:11). Most translators, however, believe that the marginal correction (<em>you acquire<\/em>) represents the original reading of the text because: (1) The scribe who made the marginal correction believed that <em>you acquire<\/em> was the original reading; (2) most ancient translations of Ruth, which predate our oldest copies of the Hebrew text, also read <em>you acquire<\/em>; and (3) it is easy to envision that an earlier Hebrew scribe (working before our earliest manuscript copies) substituted <em>I acquire<\/em>—as it appears in 4:10—in place of <em>you acquire<\/em>. • <em>That way she can have children who will carry on her husband’s name and keep the land in the family:<\/em> This sentence draws heavily on Deut 25:7. Boaz connected the duties of a family redeemer (see study notes on Ruth 2:20; Lev 25:25) with the duties of a brother-in-law (Latin <em>levir<\/em>) to provide an heir for a deceased brother (see Deut 25:5-10 for a description of <em>levirate marriage;<\/em> cp. Gen 38). There is no precise precedent for Boaz’s legal maneuver. The duty of the <em>levir<\/em> as stated in Deut 25:5-10 was not binding in this situation (neither Boaz nor the other kinsman was Elimelech’s brother, and Ruth was not Elimelech’s widow). Boaz was apparently using the spirit of the law concerning the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> (family redeemer) to establish a moral, if not a legal, obligation to serve as <em>levir<\/em> and provide the deceased with an heir to inherit the land (see study note on Lev 25:25). The concepts of land ownership and provision for an heir were intimately connected in ancient Israel (cp. Num 27:1-11). Because Naomi was beyond childbearing age, Ruth, the widow of Elimelech’s son, would be the mother for such an heir. This maneuver apparently surprised the other kinsman (Ruth 4:6), but it is clear from what follows that Boaz’s argument, while perhaps novel, was accepted as valid.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:5<\/strong> <em>your purchase . . . requires that you marry Ruth<\/em> (literally <em>on the day you purchase . . . you acquire Ruth<\/em>): In the Hebrew manuscripts that we have, the body of this verse reads <em>I acquire,<\/em> but a scribal correction in the margin reads <em>you acquire,<\/em> a difference of one letter. (The scribe believed <em>you acquire<\/em> was the original reading and that the body of the text contained an error.) Some interpreters believe the body of the Hebrew text (<em>I acquire<\/em>) is the original reading of the text, indicating that the marriage between Boaz and Ruth was already set to occur (see study note on 3:11). Most translators, however, believe that the marginal correction (<em>you acquire<\/em>) represents the original reading of the text because: (1) The scribe who made the marginal correction believed that <em>you acquire<\/em> was the original reading; (2) most ancient translations of Ruth, which predate our oldest copies of the Hebrew text, also read <em>you acquire<\/em>; and (3) it is easy to envision that an earlier Hebrew scribe (working before our earliest manuscript copies) substituted <em>I acquire<\/em>—as it appears in 4:10—in place of <em>you acquire<\/em>. • <em>That way she can have children who will carry on her husband’s name and keep the land in the family:<\/em> This sentence draws heavily on Deut 25:7. Boaz connected the duties of a family redeemer (see study notes on Ruth 2:20; Lev 25:25) with the duties of a brother-in-law (Latin <em>levir<\/em>) to provide an heir for a deceased brother (see Deut 25:5-10 for a description of <em>levirate marriage;<\/em> cp. Gen 38). There is no precise precedent for Boaz’s legal maneuver. The duty of the <em>levir<\/em> as stated in Deut 25:5-10 was not binding in this situation (neither Boaz nor the other kinsman was Elimelech’s brother, and Ruth was not Elimelech’s widow). Boaz was apparently using the spirit of the law concerning the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> (family redeemer) to establish a moral, if not a legal, obligation to serve as <em>levir<\/em> and provide the deceased with an heir to inherit the land (see study note on Lev 25:25). The concepts of land ownership and provision for an heir were intimately connected in ancient Israel (cp. Num 27:1-11). Because Naomi was beyond childbearing age, Ruth, the widow of Elimelech’s son, would be the mother for such an heir. This maneuver apparently surprised the other kinsman (Ruth 4:6), but it is clear from what follows that Boaz’s argument, while perhaps novel, was accepted as valid.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:5 your purchase . . . requires that you marry Ruth (literally on the day you purchase . . . you acquire Ruth): In the Hebrew manuscripts that we have, the body of this verse reads I acquire, but a scribal correction in the margin reads you acquire, a difference of one letter. (The scribe believed you acquire was the original reading and that the body of the text contained an error.) Some interpreters believe the body of the Hebrew text (I acquire) is the original reading of the text, indica...","summary_en":"4:5 your purchase . . . requires that you marry Ruth (literally on the day you purchase . . . you acquire Ruth): In the Hebrew manuscripts that we have, the body of this verse reads I acquire, but a scribal correction in the margin reads you acquire, a difference of one letter. (The scribe believed you acquire was the original reading and that the body of the text contained an error.) Some interpreters believe the body of the Hebrew text (I acquire) is the original reading of the text, indica...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"6":[{"id":22137,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Kinsman","title_en":"Kinsman","content_ro":"<h3>KINSMAN<\/h3>\n<p>A relative of the same family. In ancient Israel the tribe was the largest social and political unit. The smallest social unit within the tribe was the family. The relationship of one family to another was carefully regulated by the list of those to whom one should not be married (Lv 18). Those who were related, even though somewhat distantly, received by law privileges and obligations for all members of the family. It was the right of the “kinsman” to receive the inheritance of a family without heir (Nm 27:11). He was also obligated to reclaim property of a kinsman who had gone into debt (Lv 25:25-28), especially if it involved someone’s enslavement to a non-Israelite (vv 47-49). In this function the kinsman <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">karov<\/span><em>)<\/em> becomes the kinsman-redeemer <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span><em>).<\/em> In the book of Ruth, Boaz is the kinsman-redeemer: “The man is our close relative; he is one of our kinsman-redeemers” (Ruth 2:20, <span>niv<\/span>). On legal grounds Boaz had a right to reclaim the property of Naomi, but he was required by law to wait for his turn, as he was not the <em>nearest<\/em> relative (4:4). Only after this nearest relative refused (v 6) did Boaz proceed with his obligation as kinsman.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KINSMAN<\/h3>\n<p>A relative of the same family. In ancient Israel the tribe was the largest social and political unit. The smallest social unit within the tribe was the family. The relationship of one family to another was carefully regulated by the list of those to whom one should not be married (Lv 18). Those who were related, even though somewhat distantly, received by law privileges and obligations for all members of the family. It was the right of the “kinsman” to receive the inheritance of a family without heir (Nm 27:11). He was also obligated to reclaim property of a kinsman who had gone into debt (Lv 25:25-28), especially if it involved someone’s enslavement to a non-Israelite (vv 47-49). In this function the kinsman <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">karov<\/span><em>)<\/em> becomes the kinsman-redeemer <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span><em>).<\/em> In the book of Ruth, Boaz is the kinsman-redeemer: “The man is our close relative; he is one of our kinsman-redeemers” (Ruth 2:20, <span>niv<\/span>). On legal grounds Boaz had a right to reclaim the property of Naomi, but he was required by law to wait for his turn, as he was not the <em>nearest<\/em> relative (4:4). Only after this nearest relative refused (v 6) did Boaz proceed with his obligation as kinsman.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KINSMAN A relative of the same family. In ancient Israel the tribe was the largest social and political unit. The smallest social unit within the tribe was the family. The relationship of one family to another was carefully regulated by the list of those to whom one should not be married (Lv 18). Those who were related, even though somewhat distantly, received by law privileges and obligations for all members of the family. It was the right of the “kinsman” to receive the inheritance of a fam...","summary_en":"KINSMAN A relative of the same family. In ancient Israel the tribe was the largest social and political unit. The smallest social unit within the tribe was the family. The relationship of one family to another was carefully regulated by the list of those to whom one should not be married (Lv 18). Those who were related, even though somewhat distantly, received by law privileges and obligations for all members of the family. It was the right of the “kinsman” to receive the inheritance of a fam...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":46021,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:6","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:6<\/strong> <em>Then I can’t redeem it:<\/em> The addition of Ruth to the transaction completely changed the equation for the other kinsman. • <em>this might endanger my own estate:<\/em> If he bought the land, married Ruth, and raised an heir for Elimelech, he might invest many resources only to lose control of the new land, and he might not have enough to maintain his own land. If he then failed to have a second son with Ruth as his own heir, his land would be inherited by Elimelech’s heir, and his own name would die out. Even if this kinsman had acquired the land and not Ruth (see study notes on 3:11; 4:5), he still might lose his investment in the land to the heir born to Ruth. By acting to preserve his own name, this man became the no-name who refused to help his close relative.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:6<\/strong> <em>Then I can’t redeem it:<\/em> The addition of Ruth to the transaction completely changed the equation for the other kinsman. • <em>this might endanger my own estate:<\/em> If he bought the land, married Ruth, and raised an heir for Elimelech, he might invest many resources only to lose control of the new land, and he might not have enough to maintain his own land. If he then failed to have a second son with Ruth as his own heir, his land would be inherited by Elimelech’s heir, and his own name would die out. Even if this kinsman had acquired the land and not Ruth (see study notes on 3:11; 4:5), he still might lose his investment in the land to the heir born to Ruth. By acting to preserve his own name, this man became the no-name who refused to help his close relative.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:6 Then I can’t redeem it: The addition of Ruth to the transaction completely changed the equation for the other kinsman. • this might endanger my own estate: If he bought the land, married Ruth, and raised an heir for Elimelech, he might invest many resources only to lose control of the new land, and he might not have enough to maintain his own land. If he then failed to have a second son with Ruth as his own heir, his land would be inherited by Elimelech’s heir, and his own name would die ...","summary_en":"4:6 Then I can’t redeem it: The addition of Ruth to the transaction completely changed the equation for the other kinsman. • this might endanger my own estate: If he bought the land, married Ruth, and raised an heir for Elimelech, he might invest many resources only to lose control of the new land, and he might not have enough to maintain his own land. If he then failed to have a second son with Ruth as his own heir, his land would be inherited by Elimelech’s heir, and his own name would die ...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73647,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:6","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:6<\/strong> <em>Then I can’t redeem it:<\/em> The addition of Ruth to the transaction completely changed the equation for the other kinsman. • <em>this might endanger my own estate:<\/em> If he bought the land, married Ruth, and raised an heir for Elimelech, he might invest many resources only to lose control of the new land, and he might not have enough to maintain his own land. If he then failed to have a second son with Ruth as his own heir, his land would be inherited by Elimelech’s heir, and his own name would die out. Even if this kinsman had acquired the land and not Ruth (see study notes on 3:11; 4:5), he still might lose his investment in the land to the heir born to Ruth. By acting to preserve his own name, this man became the no-name who refused to help his close relative.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:6<\/strong> <em>Then I can’t redeem it:<\/em> The addition of Ruth to the transaction completely changed the equation for the other kinsman. • <em>this might endanger my own estate:<\/em> If he bought the land, married Ruth, and raised an heir for Elimelech, he might invest many resources only to lose control of the new land, and he might not have enough to maintain his own land. If he then failed to have a second son with Ruth as his own heir, his land would be inherited by Elimelech’s heir, and his own name would die out. Even if this kinsman had acquired the land and not Ruth (see study notes on 3:11; 4:5), he still might lose his investment in the land to the heir born to Ruth. By acting to preserve his own name, this man became the no-name who refused to help his close relative.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:6 Then I can’t redeem it: The addition of Ruth to the transaction completely changed the equation for the other kinsman. • this might endanger my own estate: If he bought the land, married Ruth, and raised an heir for Elimelech, he might invest many resources only to lose control of the new land, and he might not have enough to maintain his own land. If he then failed to have a second son with Ruth as his own heir, his land would be inherited by Elimelech’s heir, and his own name would die ...","summary_en":"4:6 Then I can’t redeem it: The addition of Ruth to the transaction completely changed the equation for the other kinsman. • this might endanger my own estate: If he bought the land, married Ruth, and raised an heir for Elimelech, he might invest many resources only to lose control of the new land, and he might not have enough to maintain his own land. If he then failed to have a second son with Ruth as his own heir, his land would be inherited by Elimelech’s heir, and his own name would die ...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101273,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:6","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:6<\/strong> <em>Then I can’t redeem it:<\/em> The addition of Ruth to the transaction completely changed the equation for the other kinsman. • <em>this might endanger my own estate:<\/em> If he bought the land, married Ruth, and raised an heir for Elimelech, he might invest many resources only to lose control of the new land, and he might not have enough to maintain his own land. If he then failed to have a second son with Ruth as his own heir, his land would be inherited by Elimelech’s heir, and his own name would die out. Even if this kinsman had acquired the land and not Ruth (see study notes on 3:11; 4:5), he still might lose his investment in the land to the heir born to Ruth. By acting to preserve his own name, this man became the no-name who refused to help his close relative.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:6<\/strong> <em>Then I can’t redeem it:<\/em> The addition of Ruth to the transaction completely changed the equation for the other kinsman. • <em>this might endanger my own estate:<\/em> If he bought the land, married Ruth, and raised an heir for Elimelech, he might invest many resources only to lose control of the new land, and he might not have enough to maintain his own land. If he then failed to have a second son with Ruth as his own heir, his land would be inherited by Elimelech’s heir, and his own name would die out. Even if this kinsman had acquired the land and not Ruth (see study notes on 3:11; 4:5), he still might lose his investment in the land to the heir born to Ruth. By acting to preserve his own name, this man became the no-name who refused to help his close relative.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:6 Then I can’t redeem it: The addition of Ruth to the transaction completely changed the equation for the other kinsman. • this might endanger my own estate: If he bought the land, married Ruth, and raised an heir for Elimelech, he might invest many resources only to lose control of the new land, and he might not have enough to maintain his own land. If he then failed to have a second son with Ruth as his own heir, his land would be inherited by Elimelech’s heir, and his own name would die ...","summary_en":"4:6 Then I can’t redeem it: The addition of Ruth to the transaction completely changed the equation for the other kinsman. • this might endanger my own estate: If he bought the land, married Ruth, and raised an heir for Elimelech, he might invest many resources only to lose control of the new land, and he might not have enough to maintain his own land. If he then failed to have a second son with Ruth as his own heir, his land would be inherited by Elimelech’s heir, and his own name would die ...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128899,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:6","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:6<\/strong> <em>Then I can’t redeem it:<\/em> The addition of Ruth to the transaction completely changed the equation for the other kinsman. • <em>this might endanger my own estate:<\/em> If he bought the land, married Ruth, and raised an heir for Elimelech, he might invest many resources only to lose control of the new land, and he might not have enough to maintain his own land. If he then failed to have a second son with Ruth as his own heir, his land would be inherited by Elimelech’s heir, and his own name would die out. Even if this kinsman had acquired the land and not Ruth (see study notes on 3:11; 4:5), he still might lose his investment in the land to the heir born to Ruth. By acting to preserve his own name, this man became the no-name who refused to help his close relative.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:6<\/strong> <em>Then I can’t redeem it:<\/em> The addition of Ruth to the transaction completely changed the equation for the other kinsman. • <em>this might endanger my own estate:<\/em> If he bought the land, married Ruth, and raised an heir for Elimelech, he might invest many resources only to lose control of the new land, and he might not have enough to maintain his own land. If he then failed to have a second son with Ruth as his own heir, his land would be inherited by Elimelech’s heir, and his own name would die out. Even if this kinsman had acquired the land and not Ruth (see study notes on 3:11; 4:5), he still might lose his investment in the land to the heir born to Ruth. By acting to preserve his own name, this man became the no-name who refused to help his close relative.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:6 Then I can’t redeem it: The addition of Ruth to the transaction completely changed the equation for the other kinsman. • this might endanger my own estate: If he bought the land, married Ruth, and raised an heir for Elimelech, he might invest many resources only to lose control of the new land, and he might not have enough to maintain his own land. If he then failed to have a second son with Ruth as his own heir, his land would be inherited by Elimelech’s heir, and his own name would die ...","summary_en":"4:6 Then I can’t redeem it: The addition of Ruth to the transaction completely changed the equation for the other kinsman. • this might endanger my own estate: If he bought the land, married Ruth, and raised an heir for Elimelech, he might invest many resources only to lose control of the new land, and he might not have enough to maintain his own land. If he then failed to have a second son with Ruth as his own heir, his land would be inherited by Elimelech’s heir, and his own name would die ...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"7":[{"id":38522,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Witness","title_en":"Witness","content_ro":"<h3>WITNESS<\/h3>\n<p>One who tells what he or she has seen or personally experienced, often in a court of law. The term may also refer to the testimony the person has given.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WitnessintheOldTestament\">Witness in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the judicial procedure outlined in the OT, one witness was not adequate for personal testimony against anyone, but two or three witnesses were required (Dt 17:6; 19:15). This principle was incorporated into Jewish law and is reiterated in the NT (cf. Mt 18:16; 2 Cor 13:1).<\/p>\n<p>The truth of testimony is so important that the Bible expressly forbids false witness in the ninth commandment (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20; cf. Mk 10:19; Lk 18:20). The practical wisdom of Proverbs speaks out frequently against the false witness (e.g., Prv 6:19; 14:5; 25:18). Nevertheless, false witnesses did arise (Pss 27:12; 35:11), and there are notable examples of the bringing of more than one witness in order to bring about the death of an innocent person. The case of Naboth and his vineyard is notorious; here Jezebel, wife of King Ahab, bribed two men to bear false witness against Naboth so that he would be stoned to death and her wicked husband could take the vineyard he coveted so intensely (1 Kgs 21).<\/p>\n<p>Witnesses could be tested by the judges. If the testimony of an accuser was found to be false, that person was subjected to the punishment he had sought to have executed on the defendant (Dt 19:16-21). Proverbs also speaks of the punishment of the false witness (Prv 19:5, 9; 21:28).<\/p>\n<p>The OT records several accounts of legal proceedings in which witnesses are mentioned. Most of these involve the purchase or transfer of property. Ruth 4:7-12 relates the redemption of a field from Naomi by Boaz. Isaiah found “reliable witnesses” concerning a property title written on a large tablet (Is 8:1-2). To confirm the prophecy of the return of the exiles from Babylon, Jeremiah bought and paid for a field in the presence of witnesses, who also signed the deed for the property (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>At the conclusion of his farewell message at Shechem, Joshua declared that the Israelites themselves were witnesses that they had chosen to serve the Lord; then he set up a large stone and declared that it also was a witness (Jos 24:22-27). The people of Israel themselves were declared God’s witnesses (Is 43:10; 44:8-9). They were witnesses to the existence of God, to his uniqueness, holiness, power, and love. When they failed to acknowledge his uniqueness and holiness and turned to idolatry, he sent them into captivity, as he had warned, for they had failed in their witness and had given opportunity for the enemies of God to blaspheme.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WitnessintheNewTestament\">Witness in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the various words for witness are mainly related to the verb <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">martureo<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to bear witness, be a witness.” The word “martyr” shows the ultimate form of witness in that Christians have sacrificed their lives because of their witness for Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>John the Baptist was both a witness and a martyr. As the forerunner of the Messiah, his mission was to bear witness to the light and to identify the Lamb of God (Jn 1:7-8, 19-36). The followers of Jesus, and particularly the 12 apostles, were witnesses to the person and character of Jesus. They knew him intimately, heard his teachings and observed his miracles; three were witnesses of his transfiguration (Mt 17:1-2; 2 Pt 1:17-18) and many were witnesses to his resurrection (Lk 24:48; 1 Cor 15:4-8). At the time of his ascension, the disciples were specifically commissioned to be his witnesses (Acts 1:8).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WITNESS<\/h3>\n<p>One who tells what he or she has seen or personally experienced, often in a court of law. The term may also refer to the testimony the person has given.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WitnessintheOldTestament\">Witness in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the judicial procedure outlined in the OT, one witness was not adequate for personal testimony against anyone, but two or three witnesses were required (Dt 17:6; 19:15). This principle was incorporated into Jewish law and is reiterated in the NT (cf. Mt 18:16; 2 Cor 13:1).<\/p>\n<p>The truth of testimony is so important that the Bible expressly forbids false witness in the ninth commandment (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20; cf. Mk 10:19; Lk 18:20). The practical wisdom of Proverbs speaks out frequently against the false witness (e.g., Prv 6:19; 14:5; 25:18). Nevertheless, false witnesses did arise (Pss 27:12; 35:11), and there are notable examples of the bringing of more than one witness in order to bring about the death of an innocent person. The case of Naboth and his vineyard is notorious; here Jezebel, wife of King Ahab, bribed two men to bear false witness against Naboth so that he would be stoned to death and her wicked husband could take the vineyard he coveted so intensely (1 Kgs 21).<\/p>\n<p>Witnesses could be tested by the judges. If the testimony of an accuser was found to be false, that person was subjected to the punishment he had sought to have executed on the defendant (Dt 19:16-21). Proverbs also speaks of the punishment of the false witness (Prv 19:5, 9; 21:28).<\/p>\n<p>The OT records several accounts of legal proceedings in which witnesses are mentioned. Most of these involve the purchase or transfer of property. Ruth 4:7-12 relates the redemption of a field from Naomi by Boaz. Isaiah found “reliable witnesses” concerning a property title written on a large tablet (Is 8:1-2). To confirm the prophecy of the return of the exiles from Babylon, Jeremiah bought and paid for a field in the presence of witnesses, who also signed the deed for the property (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>At the conclusion of his farewell message at Shechem, Joshua declared that the Israelites themselves were witnesses that they had chosen to serve the Lord; then he set up a large stone and declared that it also was a witness (Jos 24:22-27). The people of Israel themselves were declared God’s witnesses (Is 43:10; 44:8-9). They were witnesses to the existence of God, to his uniqueness, holiness, power, and love. When they failed to acknowledge his uniqueness and holiness and turned to idolatry, he sent them into captivity, as he had warned, for they had failed in their witness and had given opportunity for the enemies of God to blaspheme.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WitnessintheNewTestament\">Witness in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the various words for witness are mainly related to the verb <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">martureo<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to bear witness, be a witness.” The word “martyr” shows the ultimate form of witness in that Christians have sacrificed their lives because of their witness for Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>John the Baptist was both a witness and a martyr. As the forerunner of the Messiah, his mission was to bear witness to the light and to identify the Lamb of God (Jn 1:7-8, 19-36). The followers of Jesus, and particularly the 12 apostles, were witnesses to the person and character of Jesus. They knew him intimately, heard his teachings and observed his miracles; three were witnesses of his transfiguration (Mt 17:1-2; 2 Pt 1:17-18) and many were witnesses to his resurrection (Lk 24:48; 1 Cor 15:4-8). At the time of his ascension, the disciples were specifically commissioned to be his witnesses (Acts 1:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"WITNESS One who tells what he or she has seen or personally experienced, often in a court of law. The term may also refer to the testimony the person has given. Witness in the Old Testament In the judicial procedure outlined in the OT, one witness was not adequate for personal testimony against anyone, but two or three witnesses were required (Dt 17:6; 19:15). This principle was incorporated into Jewish law and is reiterated in the NT (cf. Mt 18:16; 2 Cor 13:1). The truth of testimony is so i...","summary_en":"WITNESS One who tells what he or she has seen or personally experienced, often in a court of law. The term may also refer to the testimony the person has given. Witness in the Old Testament In the judicial procedure outlined in the OT, one witness was not adequate for personal testimony against anyone, but two or three witnesses were required (Dt 17:6; 19:15). This principle was incorporated into Jewish law and is reiterated in the NT (cf. Mt 18:16; 2 Cor 13:1). The truth of testimony is so i...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":46022,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:7","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:7<\/strong> <em>in those days:<\/em> The book of Ruth was not written immediately after these events. By the time Ruth was written, most people had forgotten this custom of removing a <em>sandal<\/em> and what it meant. The transfer of a sandal symbolized <em>transferring a right of purchase<\/em> to redeem the land. See also Deut 25:9 for a similar (but not identical) custom in relation to levirate marriage; in both cases, the sandal apparently signified the right of redemption.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:7<\/strong> <em>in those days:<\/em> The book of Ruth was not written immediately after these events. By the time Ruth was written, most people had forgotten this custom of removing a <em>sandal<\/em> and what it meant. The transfer of a sandal symbolized <em>transferring a right of purchase<\/em> to redeem the land. See also Deut 25:9 for a similar (but not identical) custom in relation to levirate marriage; in both cases, the sandal apparently signified the right of redemption.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:7 in those days: The book of Ruth was not written immediately after these events. By the time Ruth was written, most people had forgotten this custom of removing a sandal and what it meant. The transfer of a sandal symbolized transferring a right of purchase to redeem the land. See also Deut 25:9 for a similar (but not identical) custom in relation to levirate marriage; in both cases, the sandal apparently signified the right of redemption.","summary_en":"4:7 in those days: The book of Ruth was not written immediately after these events. By the time Ruth was written, most people had forgotten this custom of removing a sandal and what it meant. The transfer of a sandal symbolized transferring a right of purchase to redeem the land. See also Deut 25:9 for a similar (but not identical) custom in relation to levirate marriage; in both cases, the sandal apparently signified the right of redemption.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73648,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:7","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:7<\/strong> <em>in those days:<\/em> The book of Ruth was not written immediately after these events. By the time Ruth was written, most people had forgotten this custom of removing a <em>sandal<\/em> and what it meant. The transfer of a sandal symbolized <em>transferring a right of purchase<\/em> to redeem the land. See also Deut 25:9 for a similar (but not identical) custom in relation to levirate marriage; in both cases, the sandal apparently signified the right of redemption.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:7<\/strong> <em>in those days:<\/em> The book of Ruth was not written immediately after these events. By the time Ruth was written, most people had forgotten this custom of removing a <em>sandal<\/em> and what it meant. The transfer of a sandal symbolized <em>transferring a right of purchase<\/em> to redeem the land. See also Deut 25:9 for a similar (but not identical) custom in relation to levirate marriage; in both cases, the sandal apparently signified the right of redemption.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:7 in those days: The book of Ruth was not written immediately after these events. By the time Ruth was written, most people had forgotten this custom of removing a sandal and what it meant. The transfer of a sandal symbolized transferring a right of purchase to redeem the land. See also Deut 25:9 for a similar (but not identical) custom in relation to levirate marriage; in both cases, the sandal apparently signified the right of redemption.","summary_en":"4:7 in those days: The book of Ruth was not written immediately after these events. By the time Ruth was written, most people had forgotten this custom of removing a sandal and what it meant. The transfer of a sandal symbolized transferring a right of purchase to redeem the land. See also Deut 25:9 for a similar (but not identical) custom in relation to levirate marriage; in both cases, the sandal apparently signified the right of redemption.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101274,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:7","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:7<\/strong> <em>in those days:<\/em> The book of Ruth was not written immediately after these events. By the time Ruth was written, most people had forgotten this custom of removing a <em>sandal<\/em> and what it meant. The transfer of a sandal symbolized <em>transferring a right of purchase<\/em> to redeem the land. See also Deut 25:9 for a similar (but not identical) custom in relation to levirate marriage; in both cases, the sandal apparently signified the right of redemption.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:7<\/strong> <em>in those days:<\/em> The book of Ruth was not written immediately after these events. By the time Ruth was written, most people had forgotten this custom of removing a <em>sandal<\/em> and what it meant. The transfer of a sandal symbolized <em>transferring a right of purchase<\/em> to redeem the land. See also Deut 25:9 for a similar (but not identical) custom in relation to levirate marriage; in both cases, the sandal apparently signified the right of redemption.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:7 in those days: The book of Ruth was not written immediately after these events. By the time Ruth was written, most people had forgotten this custom of removing a sandal and what it meant. The transfer of a sandal symbolized transferring a right of purchase to redeem the land. See also Deut 25:9 for a similar (but not identical) custom in relation to levirate marriage; in both cases, the sandal apparently signified the right of redemption.","summary_en":"4:7 in those days: The book of Ruth was not written immediately after these events. By the time Ruth was written, most people had forgotten this custom of removing a sandal and what it meant. The transfer of a sandal symbolized transferring a right of purchase to redeem the land. See also Deut 25:9 for a similar (but not identical) custom in relation to levirate marriage; in both cases, the sandal apparently signified the right of redemption.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128900,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:7","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:7","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:7<\/strong> <em>in those days:<\/em> The book of Ruth was not written immediately after these events. By the time Ruth was written, most people had forgotten this custom of removing a <em>sandal<\/em> and what it meant. The transfer of a sandal symbolized <em>transferring a right of purchase<\/em> to redeem the land. See also Deut 25:9 for a similar (but not identical) custom in relation to levirate marriage; in both cases, the sandal apparently signified the right of redemption.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:7<\/strong> <em>in those days:<\/em> The book of Ruth was not written immediately after these events. By the time Ruth was written, most people had forgotten this custom of removing a <em>sandal<\/em> and what it meant. The transfer of a sandal symbolized <em>transferring a right of purchase<\/em> to redeem the land. See also Deut 25:9 for a similar (but not identical) custom in relation to levirate marriage; in both cases, the sandal apparently signified the right of redemption.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:7 in those days: The book of Ruth was not written immediately after these events. By the time Ruth was written, most people had forgotten this custom of removing a sandal and what it meant. The transfer of a sandal symbolized transferring a right of purchase to redeem the land. See also Deut 25:9 for a similar (but not identical) custom in relation to levirate marriage; in both cases, the sandal apparently signified the right of redemption.","summary_en":"4:7 in those days: The book of Ruth was not written immediately after these events. By the time Ruth was written, most people had forgotten this custom of removing a sandal and what it meant. The transfer of a sandal symbolized transferring a right of purchase to redeem the land. See also Deut 25:9 for a similar (but not identical) custom in relation to levirate marriage; in both cases, the sandal apparently signified the right of redemption.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"9":[{"id":10602,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Elimelech","title_en":"Elimelech","content_ro":"<h3>ELIMELECH<\/h3>\n<p>Man from Bethlehem who took his wife, Naomi, and his sons, Mahlon and Chilion, to sojourn in Moab because of famine in Judah (Ru 1:2-3). While in Moab, he died; then his sons also died; and Naomi decided to return to Judah. One daughter-in-law, Orpah, preferred to remain in Moab; the other, Ruth, chose to accompany Naomi. Boaz, a kinsman of Elimelech, bought Elimelech’s land and married Ruth (4:9-10). From this union came a great-grandson, David, and the royal line in which the Messiah would eventually be born. <em>See<\/em> Ruth, Book of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ELIMELECH<\/h3>\n<p>Man from Bethlehem who took his wife, Naomi, and his sons, Mahlon and Chilion, to sojourn in Moab because of famine in Judah (Ru 1:2-3). While in Moab, he died; then his sons also died; and Naomi decided to return to Judah. One daughter-in-law, Orpah, preferred to remain in Moab; the other, Ruth, chose to accompany Naomi. Boaz, a kinsman of Elimelech, bought Elimelech’s land and married Ruth (4:9-10). From this union came a great-grandson, David, and the royal line in which the Messiah would eventually be born. <em>See<\/em> Ruth, Book of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ELIMELECH Man from Bethlehem who took his wife, Naomi, and his sons, Mahlon and Chilion, to sojourn in Moab because of famine in Judah (Ru 1:2-3). While in Moab, he died; then his sons also died; and Naomi decided to return to Judah. One daughter-in-law, Orpah, preferred to remain in Moab; the other, Ruth, chose to accompany Naomi. Boaz, a kinsman of Elimelech, bought Elimelech’s land and married Ruth (4:9-10). From this union came a great-grandson, David, and the royal line in which the Mess...","summary_en":"ELIMELECH Man from Bethlehem who took his wife, Naomi, and his sons, Mahlon and Chilion, to sojourn in Moab because of famine in Judah (Ru 1:2-3). While in Moab, he died; then his sons also died; and Naomi decided to return to Judah. One daughter-in-law, Orpah, preferred to remain in Moab; the other, Ruth, chose to accompany Naomi. Boaz, a kinsman of Elimelech, bought Elimelech’s land and married Ruth (4:9-10). From this union came a great-grandson, David, and the royal line in which the Mess...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11962,"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":23973,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Mahlon","title_en":"Mahlon","content_ro":"<h3>MAHLON<\/h3>\n<p>Son of Elimelech and Naomi, and Chilion’s brother. While with his family in Moab, he married Ruth, the Moabitess. He died in Moab, however, and Ruth later married Boaz (Ru 1:2, 5; 4:9-10).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MAHLON<\/h3>\n<p>Son of Elimelech and Naomi, and Chilion’s brother. While with his family in Moab, he married Ruth, the Moabitess. He died in Moab, however, and Ruth later married Boaz (Ru 1:2, 5; 4:9-10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"MAHLON Son of Elimelech and Naomi, and Chilion’s brother. While with his family in Moab, he married Ruth, the Moabitess. He died in Moab, however, and Ruth later married Boaz (Ru 1:2, 5; 4:9-10).","summary_en":"MAHLON Son of Elimelech and Naomi, and Chilion’s brother. While with his family in Moab, he married Ruth, the Moabitess. He died in Moab, however, and Ruth later married Boaz (Ru 1:2, 5; 4:9-10).","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":46023,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:10","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:10<\/strong> <em>And with the land<\/em> (literally <em>And besides<\/em>): Boaz intended to raise an heir for <em>Mahlon<\/em>, the first son, who would <em>carry on the family name of her dead husband<\/em> and inherit his land.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:10<\/strong> <em>And with the land<\/em> (literally <em>And besides<\/em>): Boaz intended to raise an heir for <em>Mahlon<\/em>, the first son, who would <em>carry on the family name of her dead husband<\/em> and inherit his land.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:10 And with the land (literally And besides): Boaz intended to raise an heir for Mahlon, the first son, who would carry on the family name of her dead husband and inherit his land.","summary_en":"4:10 And with the land (literally And besides): Boaz intended to raise an heir for Mahlon, the first son, who would carry on the family name of her dead husband and inherit his land.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73649,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:10","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:10<\/strong> <em>And with the land<\/em> (literally <em>And besides<\/em>): Boaz intended to raise an heir for <em>Mahlon<\/em>, the first son, who would <em>carry on the family name of her dead husband<\/em> and inherit his land.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:10<\/strong> <em>And with the land<\/em> (literally <em>And besides<\/em>): Boaz intended to raise an heir for <em>Mahlon<\/em>, the first son, who would <em>carry on the family name of her dead husband<\/em> and inherit his land.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:10 And with the land (literally And besides): Boaz intended to raise an heir for Mahlon, the first son, who would carry on the family name of her dead husband and inherit his land.","summary_en":"4:10 And with the land (literally And besides): Boaz intended to raise an heir for Mahlon, the first son, who would carry on the family name of her dead husband and inherit his land.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101275,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:10","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:10<\/strong> <em>And with the land<\/em> (literally <em>And besides<\/em>): Boaz intended to raise an heir for <em>Mahlon<\/em>, the first son, who would <em>carry on the family name of her dead husband<\/em> and inherit his land.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:10<\/strong> <em>And with the land<\/em> (literally <em>And besides<\/em>): Boaz intended to raise an heir for <em>Mahlon<\/em>, the first son, who would <em>carry on the family name of her dead husband<\/em> and inherit his land.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:10 And with the land (literally And besides): Boaz intended to raise an heir for Mahlon, the first son, who would carry on the family name of her dead husband and inherit his land.","summary_en":"4:10 And with the land (literally And besides): Boaz intended to raise an heir for Mahlon, the first son, who would carry on the family name of her dead husband and inherit his land.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128901,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:10","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:10<\/strong> <em>And with the land<\/em> (literally <em>And besides<\/em>): Boaz intended to raise an heir for <em>Mahlon<\/em>, the first son, who would <em>carry on the family name of her dead husband<\/em> and inherit his land.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:10<\/strong> <em>And with the land<\/em> (literally <em>And besides<\/em>): Boaz intended to raise an heir for <em>Mahlon<\/em>, the first son, who would <em>carry on the family name of her dead husband<\/em> and inherit his land.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:10 And with the land (literally And besides): Boaz intended to raise an heir for Mahlon, the first son, who would carry on the family name of her dead husband and inherit his land.","summary_en":"4:10 And with the land (literally And besides): Boaz intended to raise an heir for Mahlon, the first son, who would carry on the family name of her dead husband and inherit his land.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"11":[{"id":40709,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Rachel","title_en":"Rachel","content_ro":"<h3>Rachel<\/h3>\n<p>Rachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her.<\/p>\n<p>Laban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rachel. Unlike Leah, Rachel was barren in the early years of her marriage to Jacob (29:31; 30:1). She gave her servant Bilhah to Jacob in order to have children by her, and Dan and Naphtali were born (30:3-8). In time, Rachel conceived and bore Joseph (30:22-24), and soon after, Jacob took his wives, children, and possessions away from Haran.<\/p>\n<p>Somewhere between Bethel and Bethlehem, Rachel died while giving birth to Benjamin (35:16-20). Jacob set up a pillar over her tomb that was a landmark even in Saul’s time (1 Sam 10:2). Rachel and Leah are highly regarded for having built up the house of Israel (Ruth 4:11). In Jeremiah 31:15, Rachel is pictured as crying for her children being carried off into captivity, and Matthew recalls Jeremiah’s words at Herod’s slaughter of the male infants around Bethlehem shortly after Jesus’ birth (Matt 2:16-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:6–30:24; 31:4-19, 31-35; 33:1-7; 35:16-20; 46:19-22; 48:7; Ruth 4:11; 1 Sam 10:2; Jer 31:15; Matt 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Rachel<\/h3>\n<p>Rachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her.<\/p>\n<p>Laban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rachel. Unlike Leah, Rachel was barren in the early years of her marriage to Jacob (29:31; 30:1). She gave her servant Bilhah to Jacob in order to have children by her, and Dan and Naphtali were born (30:3-8). In time, Rachel conceived and bore Joseph (30:22-24), and soon after, Jacob took his wives, children, and possessions away from Haran.<\/p>\n<p>Somewhere between Bethel and Bethlehem, Rachel died while giving birth to Benjamin (35:16-20). Jacob set up a pillar over her tomb that was a landmark even in Saul’s time (1 Sam 10:2). Rachel and Leah are highly regarded for having built up the house of Israel (Ruth 4:11). In Jeremiah 31:15, Rachel is pictured as crying for her children being carried off into captivity, and Matthew recalls Jeremiah’s words at Herod’s slaughter of the male infants around Bethlehem shortly after Jesus’ birth (Matt 2:16-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:6–30:24; 31:4-19, 31-35; 33:1-7; 35:16-20; 46:19-22; 48:7; Ruth 4:11; 1 Sam 10:2; Jer 31:15; Matt 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Rachel Rachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her. Laban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rach...","summary_en":"Rachel Rachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her. Laban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rach...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":40738,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Leah","title_en":"Leah","content_ro":"<h3>Leah<\/h3>\n<p>Leah was Laban’s first daughter, Jacob’s unloved first wife, and Rachel’s older sister.<\/p>\n<p>After Jacob deceived his father Isaac into giving him the blessing intended for Esau (Gen 27:1-40), Jacob went to his uncle Laban in Mesopotamia to escape Esau’s revenge and find a wife (27:41–28:5). He fell in love with his cousin Rachel and arranged with her father to marry her after seven years of work (29:17-20). After the wedding feast, Laban deceived Jacob by giving him Leah instead of Rachel (29:21-25), claiming that custom required the older daughter to marry first (29:26). Leah was less attractive than her sister (29:17), and Jacob did not love her (29:30-35).<\/p>\n<p>Jacob’s love for Rachel induced him to work another seven years to marry her. Because Jacob favored Rachel, the Lord blessed Leah with six sons and a daughter (Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, and Dinah) before Rachel was able to conceive (29:31–30:22). At one point Rachel bargained with Leah for some mandrakes, a plant believed to ensure conception, in exchange for conjugal rights. Leah then conceived and bore her fifth son (30:14-17), increasing her advantage in her rivalry with Rachel.<\/p>\n<p>Leah was the mother of two tribes that played particularly significant roles in Israelite history. The tribe of Levi was the tribe of the priesthood, and the tribe of Judah became the tribe of royalty through which the promised seed (Gen 3:15; 12:2-3; 2 Sam 7:16; Matt 1:1) came in the person of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:14-35; 30:9-21; 31:4-16; 33:1-7; 34:1; 46:8-15; 49:31; Ruth 4:11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Leah<\/h3>\n<p>Leah was Laban’s first daughter, Jacob’s unloved first wife, and Rachel’s older sister.<\/p>\n<p>After Jacob deceived his father Isaac into giving him the blessing intended for Esau (Gen 27:1-40), Jacob went to his uncle Laban in Mesopotamia to escape Esau’s revenge and find a wife (27:41–28:5). He fell in love with his cousin Rachel and arranged with her father to marry her after seven years of work (29:17-20). After the wedding feast, Laban deceived Jacob by giving him Leah instead of Rachel (29:21-25), claiming that custom required the older daughter to marry first (29:26). Leah was less attractive than her sister (29:17), and Jacob did not love her (29:30-35).<\/p>\n<p>Jacob’s love for Rachel induced him to work another seven years to marry her. Because Jacob favored Rachel, the Lord blessed Leah with six sons and a daughter (Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, and Dinah) before Rachel was able to conceive (29:31–30:22). At one point Rachel bargained with Leah for some mandrakes, a plant believed to ensure conception, in exchange for conjugal rights. Leah then conceived and bore her fifth son (30:14-17), increasing her advantage in her rivalry with Rachel.<\/p>\n<p>Leah was the mother of two tribes that played particularly significant roles in Israelite history. The tribe of Levi was the tribe of the priesthood, and the tribe of Judah became the tribe of royalty through which the promised seed (Gen 3:15; 12:2-3; 2 Sam 7:16; Matt 1:1) came in the person of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:14-35; 30:9-21; 31:4-16; 33:1-7; 34:1; 46:8-15; 49:31; Ruth 4:11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Leah Leah was Laban’s first daughter, Jacob’s unloved first wife, and Rachel’s older sister. After Jacob deceived his father Isaac into giving him the blessing intended for Esau (Gen 27:1-40), Jacob went to his uncle Laban in Mesopotamia to escape Esau’s revenge and find a wife (27:41–28:5). He fell in love with his cousin Rachel and arranged with her father to marry her after seven years of work (29:17-20). After the wedding feast, Laban deceived Jacob by giving him Leah instead of Rachel (2...","summary_en":"Leah Leah was Laban’s first daughter, Jacob’s unloved first wife, and Rachel’s older sister. After Jacob deceived his father Isaac into giving him the blessing intended for Esau (Gen 27:1-40), Jacob went to his uncle Laban in Mesopotamia to escape Esau’s revenge and find a wife (27:41–28:5). He fell in love with his cousin Rachel and arranged with her father to marry her after seven years of work (29:17-20). After the wedding feast, Laban deceived Jacob by giving him Leah instead of Rachel (2...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":68335,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Rachel","title_en":"Rachel","content_ro":"<h3>Rachel<\/h3>\n<p>Rachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her.<\/p>\n<p>Laban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rachel. Unlike Leah, Rachel was barren in the early years of her marriage to Jacob (29:31; 30:1). She gave her servant Bilhah to Jacob in order to have children by her, and Dan and Naphtali were born (30:3-8). In time, Rachel conceived and bore Joseph (30:22-24), and soon after, Jacob took his wives, children, and possessions away from Haran.<\/p>\n<p>Somewhere between Bethel and Bethlehem, Rachel died while giving birth to Benjamin (35:16-20). Jacob set up a pillar over her tomb that was a landmark even in Saul’s time (1 Sam 10:2). Rachel and Leah are highly regarded for having built up the house of Israel (Ruth 4:11). In Jeremiah 31:15, Rachel is pictured as crying for her children being carried off into captivity, and Matthew recalls Jeremiah’s words at Herod’s slaughter of the male infants around Bethlehem shortly after Jesus’ birth (Matt 2:16-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:6–30:24; 31:4-19, 31-35; 33:1-7; 35:16-20; 46:19-22; 48:7; Ruth 4:11; 1 Sam 10:2; Jer 31:15; Matt 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Rachel<\/h3>\n<p>Rachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her.<\/p>\n<p>Laban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rachel. Unlike Leah, Rachel was barren in the early years of her marriage to Jacob (29:31; 30:1). She gave her servant Bilhah to Jacob in order to have children by her, and Dan and Naphtali were born (30:3-8). In time, Rachel conceived and bore Joseph (30:22-24), and soon after, Jacob took his wives, children, and possessions away from Haran.<\/p>\n<p>Somewhere between Bethel and Bethlehem, Rachel died while giving birth to Benjamin (35:16-20). Jacob set up a pillar over her tomb that was a landmark even in Saul’s time (1 Sam 10:2). Rachel and Leah are highly regarded for having built up the house of Israel (Ruth 4:11). In Jeremiah 31:15, Rachel is pictured as crying for her children being carried off into captivity, and Matthew recalls Jeremiah’s words at Herod’s slaughter of the male infants around Bethlehem shortly after Jesus’ birth (Matt 2:16-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:6–30:24; 31:4-19, 31-35; 33:1-7; 35:16-20; 46:19-22; 48:7; Ruth 4:11; 1 Sam 10:2; Jer 31:15; Matt 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Rachel Rachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her. Laban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rach...","summary_en":"Rachel Rachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her. Laban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rach...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":68364,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Leah","title_en":"Leah","content_ro":"<h3>Leah<\/h3>\n<p>Leah was Laban’s first daughter, Jacob’s unloved first wife, and Rachel’s older sister.<\/p>\n<p>After Jacob deceived his father Isaac into giving him the blessing intended for Esau (Gen 27:1-40), Jacob went to his uncle Laban in Mesopotamia to escape Esau’s revenge and find a wife (27:41–28:5). He fell in love with his cousin Rachel and arranged with her father to marry her after seven years of work (29:17-20). After the wedding feast, Laban deceived Jacob by giving him Leah instead of Rachel (29:21-25), claiming that custom required the older daughter to marry first (29:26). Leah was less attractive than her sister (29:17), and Jacob did not love her (29:30-35).<\/p>\n<p>Jacob’s love for Rachel induced him to work another seven years to marry her. Because Jacob favored Rachel, the Lord blessed Leah with six sons and a daughter (Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, and Dinah) before Rachel was able to conceive (29:31–30:22). At one point Rachel bargained with Leah for some mandrakes, a plant believed to ensure conception, in exchange for conjugal rights. Leah then conceived and bore her fifth son (30:14-17), increasing her advantage in her rivalry with Rachel.<\/p>\n<p>Leah was the mother of two tribes that played particularly significant roles in Israelite history. The tribe of Levi was the tribe of the priesthood, and the tribe of Judah became the tribe of royalty through which the promised seed (Gen 3:15; 12:2-3; 2 Sam 7:16; Matt 1:1) came in the person of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:14-35; 30:9-21; 31:4-16; 33:1-7; 34:1; 46:8-15; 49:31; Ruth 4:11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Leah<\/h3>\n<p>Leah was Laban’s first daughter, Jacob’s unloved first wife, and Rachel’s older sister.<\/p>\n<p>After Jacob deceived his father Isaac into giving him the blessing intended for Esau (Gen 27:1-40), Jacob went to his uncle Laban in Mesopotamia to escape Esau’s revenge and find a wife (27:41–28:5). He fell in love with his cousin Rachel and arranged with her father to marry her after seven years of work (29:17-20). After the wedding feast, Laban deceived Jacob by giving him Leah instead of Rachel (29:21-25), claiming that custom required the older daughter to marry first (29:26). Leah was less attractive than her sister (29:17), and Jacob did not love her (29:30-35).<\/p>\n<p>Jacob’s love for Rachel induced him to work another seven years to marry her. Because Jacob favored Rachel, the Lord blessed Leah with six sons and a daughter (Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, and Dinah) before Rachel was able to conceive (29:31–30:22). At one point Rachel bargained with Leah for some mandrakes, a plant believed to ensure conception, in exchange for conjugal rights. Leah then conceived and bore her fifth son (30:14-17), increasing her advantage in her rivalry with Rachel.<\/p>\n<p>Leah was the mother of two tribes that played particularly significant roles in Israelite history. The tribe of Levi was the tribe of the priesthood, and the tribe of Judah became the tribe of royalty through which the promised seed (Gen 3:15; 12:2-3; 2 Sam 7:16; Matt 1:1) came in the person of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:14-35; 30:9-21; 31:4-16; 33:1-7; 34:1; 46:8-15; 49:31; Ruth 4:11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Leah Leah was Laban’s first daughter, Jacob’s unloved first wife, and Rachel’s older sister. After Jacob deceived his father Isaac into giving him the blessing intended for Esau (Gen 27:1-40), Jacob went to his uncle Laban in Mesopotamia to escape Esau’s revenge and find a wife (27:41–28:5). He fell in love with his cousin Rachel and arranged with her father to marry her after seven years of work (29:17-20). After the wedding feast, Laban deceived Jacob by giving him Leah instead of Rachel (2...","summary_en":"Leah Leah was Laban’s first daughter, Jacob’s unloved first wife, and Rachel’s older sister. After Jacob deceived his father Isaac into giving him the blessing intended for Esau (Gen 27:1-40), Jacob went to his uncle Laban in Mesopotamia to escape Esau’s revenge and find a wife (27:41–28:5). He fell in love with his cousin Rachel and arranged with her father to marry her after seven years of work (29:17-20). After the wedding feast, Laban deceived Jacob by giving him Leah instead of Rachel (2...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95961,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Rachel","title_en":"Rachel","content_ro":"<h3>Rachel<\/h3>\n<p>Rachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her.<\/p>\n<p>Laban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rachel. Unlike Leah, Rachel was barren in the early years of her marriage to Jacob (29:31; 30:1). She gave her servant Bilhah to Jacob in order to have children by her, and Dan and Naphtali were born (30:3-8). In time, Rachel conceived and bore Joseph (30:22-24), and soon after, Jacob took his wives, children, and possessions away from Haran.<\/p>\n<p>Somewhere between Bethel and Bethlehem, Rachel died while giving birth to Benjamin (35:16-20). Jacob set up a pillar over her tomb that was a landmark even in Saul’s time (1 Sam 10:2). Rachel and Leah are highly regarded for having built up the house of Israel (Ruth 4:11). In Jeremiah 31:15, Rachel is pictured as crying for her children being carried off into captivity, and Matthew recalls Jeremiah’s words at Herod’s slaughter of the male infants around Bethlehem shortly after Jesus’ birth (Matt 2:16-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:6–30:24; 31:4-19, 31-35; 33:1-7; 35:16-20; 46:19-22; 48:7; Ruth 4:11; 1 Sam 10:2; Jer 31:15; Matt 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Rachel<\/h3>\n<p>Rachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her.<\/p>\n<p>Laban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rachel. Unlike Leah, Rachel was barren in the early years of her marriage to Jacob (29:31; 30:1). She gave her servant Bilhah to Jacob in order to have children by her, and Dan and Naphtali were born (30:3-8). In time, Rachel conceived and bore Joseph (30:22-24), and soon after, Jacob took his wives, children, and possessions away from Haran.<\/p>\n<p>Somewhere between Bethel and Bethlehem, Rachel died while giving birth to Benjamin (35:16-20). Jacob set up a pillar over her tomb that was a landmark even in Saul’s time (1 Sam 10:2). Rachel and Leah are highly regarded for having built up the house of Israel (Ruth 4:11). In Jeremiah 31:15, Rachel is pictured as crying for her children being carried off into captivity, and Matthew recalls Jeremiah’s words at Herod’s slaughter of the male infants around Bethlehem shortly after Jesus’ birth (Matt 2:16-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:6–30:24; 31:4-19, 31-35; 33:1-7; 35:16-20; 46:19-22; 48:7; Ruth 4:11; 1 Sam 10:2; Jer 31:15; Matt 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Rachel Rachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her. Laban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rach...","summary_en":"Rachel Rachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her. Laban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rach...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95990,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Leah","title_en":"Leah","content_ro":"<h3>Leah<\/h3>\n<p>Leah was Laban’s first daughter, Jacob’s unloved first wife, and Rachel’s older sister.<\/p>\n<p>After Jacob deceived his father Isaac into giving him the blessing intended for Esau (Gen 27:1-40), Jacob went to his uncle Laban in Mesopotamia to escape Esau’s revenge and find a wife (27:41–28:5). He fell in love with his cousin Rachel and arranged with her father to marry her after seven years of work (29:17-20). After the wedding feast, Laban deceived Jacob by giving him Leah instead of Rachel (29:21-25), claiming that custom required the older daughter to marry first (29:26). Leah was less attractive than her sister (29:17), and Jacob did not love her (29:30-35).<\/p>\n<p>Jacob’s love for Rachel induced him to work another seven years to marry her. Because Jacob favored Rachel, the Lord blessed Leah with six sons and a daughter (Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, and Dinah) before Rachel was able to conceive (29:31–30:22). At one point Rachel bargained with Leah for some mandrakes, a plant believed to ensure conception, in exchange for conjugal rights. Leah then conceived and bore her fifth son (30:14-17), increasing her advantage in her rivalry with Rachel.<\/p>\n<p>Leah was the mother of two tribes that played particularly significant roles in Israelite history. The tribe of Levi was the tribe of the priesthood, and the tribe of Judah became the tribe of royalty through which the promised seed (Gen 3:15; 12:2-3; 2 Sam 7:16; Matt 1:1) came in the person of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:14-35; 30:9-21; 31:4-16; 33:1-7; 34:1; 46:8-15; 49:31; Ruth 4:11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Leah<\/h3>\n<p>Leah was Laban’s first daughter, Jacob’s unloved first wife, and Rachel’s older sister.<\/p>\n<p>After Jacob deceived his father Isaac into giving him the blessing intended for Esau (Gen 27:1-40), Jacob went to his uncle Laban in Mesopotamia to escape Esau’s revenge and find a wife (27:41–28:5). He fell in love with his cousin Rachel and arranged with her father to marry her after seven years of work (29:17-20). After the wedding feast, Laban deceived Jacob by giving him Leah instead of Rachel (29:21-25), claiming that custom required the older daughter to marry first (29:26). Leah was less attractive than her sister (29:17), and Jacob did not love her (29:30-35).<\/p>\n<p>Jacob’s love for Rachel induced him to work another seven years to marry her. Because Jacob favored Rachel, the Lord blessed Leah with six sons and a daughter (Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, and Dinah) before Rachel was able to conceive (29:31–30:22). At one point Rachel bargained with Leah for some mandrakes, a plant believed to ensure conception, in exchange for conjugal rights. Leah then conceived and bore her fifth son (30:14-17), increasing her advantage in her rivalry with Rachel.<\/p>\n<p>Leah was the mother of two tribes that played particularly significant roles in Israelite history. The tribe of Levi was the tribe of the priesthood, and the tribe of Judah became the tribe of royalty through which the promised seed (Gen 3:15; 12:2-3; 2 Sam 7:16; Matt 1:1) came in the person of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:14-35; 30:9-21; 31:4-16; 33:1-7; 34:1; 46:8-15; 49:31; Ruth 4:11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Leah Leah was Laban’s first daughter, Jacob’s unloved first wife, and Rachel’s older sister. After Jacob deceived his father Isaac into giving him the blessing intended for Esau (Gen 27:1-40), Jacob went to his uncle Laban in Mesopotamia to escape Esau’s revenge and find a wife (27:41–28:5). He fell in love with his cousin Rachel and arranged with her father to marry her after seven years of work (29:17-20). After the wedding feast, Laban deceived Jacob by giving him Leah instead of Rachel (2...","summary_en":"Leah Leah was Laban’s first daughter, Jacob’s unloved first wife, and Rachel’s older sister. After Jacob deceived his father Isaac into giving him the blessing intended for Esau (Gen 27:1-40), Jacob went to his uncle Laban in Mesopotamia to escape Esau’s revenge and find a wife (27:41–28:5). He fell in love with his cousin Rachel and arranged with her father to marry her after seven years of work (29:17-20). After the wedding feast, Laban deceived Jacob by giving him Leah instead of Rachel (2...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":123587,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Rachel","title_en":"Rachel","content_ro":"<h3>Rachel<\/h3>\n<p>Rachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her.<\/p>\n<p>Laban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rachel. Unlike Leah, Rachel was barren in the early years of her marriage to Jacob (29:31; 30:1). She gave her servant Bilhah to Jacob in order to have children by her, and Dan and Naphtali were born (30:3-8). In time, Rachel conceived and bore Joseph (30:22-24), and soon after, Jacob took his wives, children, and possessions away from Haran.<\/p>\n<p>Somewhere between Bethel and Bethlehem, Rachel died while giving birth to Benjamin (35:16-20). Jacob set up a pillar over her tomb that was a landmark even in Saul’s time (1 Sam 10:2). Rachel and Leah are highly regarded for having built up the house of Israel (Ruth 4:11). In Jeremiah 31:15, Rachel is pictured as crying for her children being carried off into captivity, and Matthew recalls Jeremiah’s words at Herod’s slaughter of the male infants around Bethlehem shortly after Jesus’ birth (Matt 2:16-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:6–30:24; 31:4-19, 31-35; 33:1-7; 35:16-20; 46:19-22; 48:7; Ruth 4:11; 1 Sam 10:2; Jer 31:15; Matt 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Rachel<\/h3>\n<p>Rachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her.<\/p>\n<p>Laban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rachel. Unlike Leah, Rachel was barren in the early years of her marriage to Jacob (29:31; 30:1). She gave her servant Bilhah to Jacob in order to have children by her, and Dan and Naphtali were born (30:3-8). In time, Rachel conceived and bore Joseph (30:22-24), and soon after, Jacob took his wives, children, and possessions away from Haran.<\/p>\n<p>Somewhere between Bethel and Bethlehem, Rachel died while giving birth to Benjamin (35:16-20). Jacob set up a pillar over her tomb that was a landmark even in Saul’s time (1 Sam 10:2). Rachel and Leah are highly regarded for having built up the house of Israel (Ruth 4:11). In Jeremiah 31:15, Rachel is pictured as crying for her children being carried off into captivity, and Matthew recalls Jeremiah’s words at Herod’s slaughter of the male infants around Bethlehem shortly after Jesus’ birth (Matt 2:16-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:6–30:24; 31:4-19, 31-35; 33:1-7; 35:16-20; 46:19-22; 48:7; Ruth 4:11; 1 Sam 10:2; Jer 31:15; Matt 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Rachel Rachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her. Laban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rach...","summary_en":"Rachel Rachel, Laban’s beautiful younger daughter, was Jacob’s favorite wife. He first met her as he arrived at Paddan-aram in Haran, when he helped her remove the stone from a well and watered her father’s sheep (Gen 29:10). Jacob agreed to work seven years for Laban in order to have Rachel as his wife, and the time seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her. Laban deceptively required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rach...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":123616,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Leah","title_en":"Leah","content_ro":"<h3>Leah<\/h3>\n<p>Leah was Laban’s first daughter, Jacob’s unloved first wife, and Rachel’s older sister.<\/p>\n<p>After Jacob deceived his father Isaac into giving him the blessing intended for Esau (Gen 27:1-40), Jacob went to his uncle Laban in Mesopotamia to escape Esau’s revenge and find a wife (27:41–28:5). He fell in love with his cousin Rachel and arranged with her father to marry her after seven years of work (29:17-20). After the wedding feast, Laban deceived Jacob by giving him Leah instead of Rachel (29:21-25), claiming that custom required the older daughter to marry first (29:26). Leah was less attractive than her sister (29:17), and Jacob did not love her (29:30-35).<\/p>\n<p>Jacob’s love for Rachel induced him to work another seven years to marry her. Because Jacob favored Rachel, the Lord blessed Leah with six sons and a daughter (Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, and Dinah) before Rachel was able to conceive (29:31–30:22). At one point Rachel bargained with Leah for some mandrakes, a plant believed to ensure conception, in exchange for conjugal rights. Leah then conceived and bore her fifth son (30:14-17), increasing her advantage in her rivalry with Rachel.<\/p>\n<p>Leah was the mother of two tribes that played particularly significant roles in Israelite history. The tribe of Levi was the tribe of the priesthood, and the tribe of Judah became the tribe of royalty through which the promised seed (Gen 3:15; 12:2-3; 2 Sam 7:16; Matt 1:1) came in the person of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:14-35; 30:9-21; 31:4-16; 33:1-7; 34:1; 46:8-15; 49:31; Ruth 4:11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Leah<\/h3>\n<p>Leah was Laban’s first daughter, Jacob’s unloved first wife, and Rachel’s older sister.<\/p>\n<p>After Jacob deceived his father Isaac into giving him the blessing intended for Esau (Gen 27:1-40), Jacob went to his uncle Laban in Mesopotamia to escape Esau’s revenge and find a wife (27:41–28:5). He fell in love with his cousin Rachel and arranged with her father to marry her after seven years of work (29:17-20). After the wedding feast, Laban deceived Jacob by giving him Leah instead of Rachel (29:21-25), claiming that custom required the older daughter to marry first (29:26). Leah was less attractive than her sister (29:17), and Jacob did not love her (29:30-35).<\/p>\n<p>Jacob’s love for Rachel induced him to work another seven years to marry her. Because Jacob favored Rachel, the Lord blessed Leah with six sons and a daughter (Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, and Dinah) before Rachel was able to conceive (29:31–30:22). At one point Rachel bargained with Leah for some mandrakes, a plant believed to ensure conception, in exchange for conjugal rights. Leah then conceived and bore her fifth son (30:14-17), increasing her advantage in her rivalry with Rachel.<\/p>\n<p>Leah was the mother of two tribes that played particularly significant roles in Israelite history. The tribe of Levi was the tribe of the priesthood, and the tribe of Judah became the tribe of royalty through which the promised seed (Gen 3:15; 12:2-3; 2 Sam 7:16; Matt 1:1) came in the person of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:14-35; 30:9-21; 31:4-16; 33:1-7; 34:1; 46:8-15; 49:31; Ruth 4:11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Leah Leah was Laban’s first daughter, Jacob’s unloved first wife, and Rachel’s older sister. After Jacob deceived his father Isaac into giving him the blessing intended for Esau (Gen 27:1-40), Jacob went to his uncle Laban in Mesopotamia to escape Esau’s revenge and find a wife (27:41–28:5). He fell in love with his cousin Rachel and arranged with her father to marry her after seven years of work (29:17-20). After the wedding feast, Laban deceived Jacob by giving him Leah instead of Rachel (2...","summary_en":"Leah Leah was Laban’s first daughter, Jacob’s unloved first wife, and Rachel’s older sister. After Jacob deceived his father Isaac into giving him the blessing intended for Esau (Gen 27:1-40), Jacob went to his uncle Laban in Mesopotamia to escape Esau’s revenge and find a wife (27:41–28:5). He fell in love with his cousin Rachel and arranged with her father to marry her after seven years of work (29:17-20). After the wedding feast, Laban deceived Jacob by giving him Leah instead of Rachel (2...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4499,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Bethlehem","title_en":"Bethlehem","content_ro":"<h3>BETHLEHEM<\/h3>\n<li>1. “City of David” and the birthplace of Jesus Christ, five miles (8 kilometers) south of Jerusalem. This city is sometimes called Bethlehem-judah (<span>kjv<\/span>) or Ephrath (Gn 35:19; Mi 5:2) to distinguish it from the Bethlehem of Zebulun.<\/li>\n<p>As an early Canaanite settlement, it was associated with the patriarchs, for Rachel died and was buried in its vicinity (Gn 35:16, 19; 48:7). The earliest known historical reference to Bethlehem occurs in the Amarna texts (14th century <span>BC<\/span>) in which battle reports refer to <em>bitil u-lahama<\/em> south of Jerusalem. The name may have meant “house of (the goddess) Lahama.” A branch of Caleb’s family settled there, and Caleb’s son Salma was known as “the father of Bethlehem” (1 Chr 2:51). Bethlehem was the home of a young Levite who served as priest to Micah (Jgs 17:7-8), and of Boaz, Ruth, Obed, and Jesse, the Bethlehemite, David’s father (Ru 4:11, 17; 1 Sm 16:18).<\/p>\n<p>Bethlehem was the birthplace of David (1 Sm 17:12) and the home of one of David’s mighty men, Elhanan (2 Sm 23:24; 1 Chr 11:26). It was the scene of a daring exploit by three of David’s warriors; they broke through the cordon of Philistine marauders occupying Bethlehem to bring David water from the well (or cistern) near the city gate of his hometown (2 Sm 23:14-17). Much later, Bethlehem is mentioned as being adjacent to the village of Geruth-kimham, where Jews fleeing from the Babylonians stayed en route to Egypt (Jer 41:17). People from Bethlehem were among those returning from the Babylonian exile (Ezr 2:21; Neh 7:26; 1 Esd 5:17).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was born there, Bethlehem was only a village (Mt 2:1-16; Lk 2:4-6, 15; Jn 7:42). Under the census decree of Caesar Augustus, Joseph had to go to Bethlehem “because he was of the house and lineage of David” (Lk 2:4). The family may still have had property there. The birth of Jesus possibly took place in a cave in the rocks outside the town. The early Christian writer Justin Martyr thought so, as did Origen some years later. Origen frequently resided in the Holy Land and wrote, “In Bethlehem you are shown the cave where he was born, and within the cave the manger where he was wrapped in swaddling clothes.”<\/p>\n<p>Jerome later described the grotto over which the Emperor Constantine had built a basilica. In excavations in 1934–35, evidence indicated a second period of building in the reign of Justinian (<span>AD<\/span> 527–565), when Constantine’s basilica was extended beyond its original proportions. Steps lead down to the grotto, the rectangular shape of which suggests that Constantine’s builders reshaped the original. But there is no description of the grotto prior to the construction of Constantine’s basilica.<\/p>\n<li>2. Town in Zebulun (Jos 19:15), probably the home of the judge Ibzan (Jgs 12:8-10), an early ruler of Israel. It is identified today with the village of Beit Lahm, some seven miles (11.3 kilometers) northwest of Nazareth.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>BETHLEHEM<\/h3>\n<li>1. “City of David” and the birthplace of Jesus Christ, five miles (8 kilometers) south of Jerusalem. This city is sometimes called Bethlehem-judah (<span>kjv<\/span>) or Ephrath (Gn 35:19; Mi 5:2) to distinguish it from the Bethlehem of Zebulun.<\/li>\n<p>As an early Canaanite settlement, it was associated with the patriarchs, for Rachel died and was buried in its vicinity (Gn 35:16, 19; 48:7). The earliest known historical reference to Bethlehem occurs in the Amarna texts (14th century <span>BC<\/span>) in which battle reports refer to <em>bitil u-lahama<\/em> south of Jerusalem. The name may have meant “house of (the goddess) Lahama.” A branch of Caleb’s family settled there, and Caleb’s son Salma was known as “the father of Bethlehem” (1 Chr 2:51). Bethlehem was the home of a young Levite who served as priest to Micah (Jgs 17:7-8), and of Boaz, Ruth, Obed, and Jesse, the Bethlehemite, David’s father (Ru 4:11, 17; 1 Sm 16:18).<\/p>\n<p>Bethlehem was the birthplace of David (1 Sm 17:12) and the home of one of David’s mighty men, Elhanan (2 Sm 23:24; 1 Chr 11:26). It was the scene of a daring exploit by three of David’s warriors; they broke through the cordon of Philistine marauders occupying Bethlehem to bring David water from the well (or cistern) near the city gate of his hometown (2 Sm 23:14-17). Much later, Bethlehem is mentioned as being adjacent to the village of Geruth-kimham, where Jews fleeing from the Babylonians stayed en route to Egypt (Jer 41:17). People from Bethlehem were among those returning from the Babylonian exile (Ezr 2:21; Neh 7:26; 1 Esd 5:17).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was born there, Bethlehem was only a village (Mt 2:1-16; Lk 2:4-6, 15; Jn 7:42). Under the census decree of Caesar Augustus, Joseph had to go to Bethlehem “because he was of the house and lineage of David” (Lk 2:4). The family may still have had property there. The birth of Jesus possibly took place in a cave in the rocks outside the town. The early Christian writer Justin Martyr thought so, as did Origen some years later. Origen frequently resided in the Holy Land and wrote, “In Bethlehem you are shown the cave where he was born, and within the cave the manger where he was wrapped in swaddling clothes.”<\/p>\n<p>Jerome later described the grotto over which the Emperor Constantine had built a basilica. In excavations in 1934–35, evidence indicated a second period of building in the reign of Justinian (<span>AD<\/span> 527–565), when Constantine’s basilica was extended beyond its original proportions. Steps lead down to the grotto, the rectangular shape of which suggests that Constantine’s builders reshaped the original. But there is no description of the grotto prior to the construction of Constantine’s basilica.<\/p>\n<li>2. Town in Zebulun (Jos 19:15), probably the home of the judge Ibzan (Jgs 12:8-10), an early ruler of Israel. It is identified today with the village of Beit Lahm, some seven miles (11.3 kilometers) northwest of Nazareth.<\/li>","summary_ro":"BETHLEHEM 1. “City of David” and the birthplace of Jesus Christ, five miles (8 kilometers) south of Jerusalem. This city is sometimes called Bethlehem-judah (kjv) or Ephrath (Gn 35:19; Mi 5:2) to distinguish it from the Bethlehem of Zebulun. As an early Canaanite settlement, it was associated with the patriarchs, for Rachel died and was buried in its vicinity (Gn 35:16, 19; 48:7). The earliest known historical reference to Bethlehem occurs in the Amarna texts (14th century BC) in which battle...","summary_en":"BETHLEHEM 1. “City of David” and the birthplace of Jesus Christ, five miles (8 kilometers) south of Jerusalem. This city is sometimes called Bethlehem-judah (kjv) or Ephrath (Gn 35:19; Mi 5:2) to distinguish it from the Bethlehem of Zebulun. As an early Canaanite settlement, it was associated with the patriarchs, for Rachel died and was buried in its vicinity (Gn 35:16, 19; 48:7). The earliest known historical reference to Bethlehem occurs in the Amarna texts (14th century BC) in which battle...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11009,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ephrath (Place)","title_en":"Ephrath (Place)","content_ro":"<h3>EPHRATH (P<span>lace<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Town in the Judean hill country later named Bethlehem. It was on the road to Ephrath that Rachel died while giving birth to Benjamin (Gn 35:16-19). This town was the home of Naomi’s family, who identified themselves as Ephrathites (Ru 1:2). Ephrath was the dwelling place of Ruth and Boaz (Ru 4:11), the childhood home of David (1 Sm 17:12), and the announced birthplace of the Messiah (Mi 5:2).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bethlehem #1.<\/p>\n<li>2. District in which the city of Kiriath-jearim was situated and where the ark of the covenant was kept (Ps 132:6).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>EPHRATH (P<span>lace<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Town in the Judean hill country later named Bethlehem. It was on the road to Ephrath that Rachel died while giving birth to Benjamin (Gn 35:16-19). This town was the home of Naomi’s family, who identified themselves as Ephrathites (Ru 1:2). Ephrath was the dwelling place of Ruth and Boaz (Ru 4:11), the childhood home of David (1 Sm 17:12), and the announced birthplace of the Messiah (Mi 5:2).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bethlehem #1.<\/p>\n<li>2. District in which the city of Kiriath-jearim was situated and where the ark of the covenant was kept (Ps 132:6).<\/li>","summary_ro":"EPHRATH (Place) 1. Town in the Judean hill country later named Bethlehem. It was on the road to Ephrath that Rachel died while giving birth to Benjamin (Gn 35:16-19). This town was the home of Naomi’s family, who identified themselves as Ephrathites (Ru 1:2). Ephrath was the dwelling place of Ruth and Boaz (Ru 4:11), the childhood home of David (1 Sm 17:12), and the announced birthplace of the Messiah (Mi 5:2). See also Bethlehem #1. 2. District in which the city of Kiriath-jearim was situate...","summary_en":"EPHRATH (Place) 1. Town in the Judean hill country later named Bethlehem. It was on the road to Ephrath that Rachel died while giving birth to Benjamin (Gn 35:16-19). This town was the home of Naomi’s family, who identified themselves as Ephrathites (Ru 1:2). Ephrath was the dwelling place of Ruth and Boaz (Ru 4:11), the childhood home of David (1 Sm 17:12), and the announced birthplace of the Messiah (Mi 5:2). See also Bethlehem #1. 2. District in which the city of Kiriath-jearim was situate...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32306,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Rachel","title_en":"Rachel","content_ro":"<h3>RACHEL<\/h3>\n<p>Beautiful younger daughter of Laban; she was the favorite wife of Jacob. He first met her as he arrived at Haran in Paddan-aram. There he assisted her by attending to the needs of Rachel’s father’s sheep, removing a stone from the mouth of a well in order to water them (Gn 29:10). Jacob loved Rachel exceedingly and agreed to work seven years for Laban in return for her hand in marriage. His seven years’ service seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her. Laban deceptively reneged on his bargain and required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rachel for his wife. Unlike Leah, Rachel was barren in the early years of her marriage to Jacob (30:1). Consequently, she gave her servant, Bilhah, to Jacob in order to have children. Thus, through this commonly accepted ancient custom, Dan and Naphtali were born. In time, Rachel herself conceived and bore Joseph (vv 22-25). After this, Jacob took his wives, children, and possessions away from Haran.<\/p>\n<p>Somewhere between Bethel and Bethlehem, Rachel died while giving birth to Benjamin (Gn 35:16, 19). Jacob set up a pillar over her tomb there, a landmark known even in the days of Saul (1 Sm 10:2). Rachel and Leah are highly regarded as those who built up the house of Israel (Ru 4:11). In Jeremiah 31:15, Rachel is pictured as crying for her children being carried off into captivity. Later, Matthew recalls Jeremiah’s words in Herod’s slaughter of the male infants (Mt 2:18).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jacob #1.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RACHEL<\/h3>\n<p>Beautiful younger daughter of Laban; she was the favorite wife of Jacob. He first met her as he arrived at Haran in Paddan-aram. There he assisted her by attending to the needs of Rachel’s father’s sheep, removing a stone from the mouth of a well in order to water them (Gn 29:10). Jacob loved Rachel exceedingly and agreed to work seven years for Laban in return for her hand in marriage. His seven years’ service seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her. Laban deceptively reneged on his bargain and required Jacob to marry Leah, his older, less attractive daughter, before finally giving him Rachel for his wife. Unlike Leah, Rachel was barren in the early years of her marriage to Jacob (30:1). Consequently, she gave her servant, Bilhah, to Jacob in order to have children. Thus, through this commonly accepted ancient custom, Dan and Naphtali were born. In time, Rachel herself conceived and bore Joseph (vv 22-25). After this, Jacob took his wives, children, and possessions away from Haran.<\/p>\n<p>Somewhere between Bethel and Bethlehem, Rachel died while giving birth to Benjamin (Gn 35:16, 19). Jacob set up a pillar over her tomb there, a landmark known even in the days of Saul (1 Sm 10:2). Rachel and Leah are highly regarded as those who built up the house of Israel (Ru 4:11). In Jeremiah 31:15, Rachel is pictured as crying for her children being carried off into captivity. Later, Matthew recalls Jeremiah’s words in Herod’s slaughter of the male infants (Mt 2:18).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jacob #1.<\/p>","summary_ro":"RACHEL Beautiful younger daughter of Laban; she was the favorite wife of Jacob. He first met her as he arrived at Haran in Paddan-aram. There he assisted her by attending to the needs of Rachel’s father’s sheep, removing a stone from the mouth of a well in order to water them (Gn 29:10). Jacob loved Rachel exceedingly and agreed to work seven years for Laban in return for her hand in marriage. His seven years’ service seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her. Laban decept...","summary_en":"RACHEL Beautiful younger daughter of Laban; she was the favorite wife of Jacob. He first met her as he arrived at Haran in Paddan-aram. There he assisted her by attending to the needs of Rachel’s father’s sheep, removing a stone from the mouth of a well in order to water them (Gn 29:10). Jacob loved Rachel exceedingly and agreed to work seven years for Laban in return for her hand in marriage. His seven years’ service seemed like only a few days because of his great love for her. Laban decept...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":46024,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:11","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:11<\/strong> <em>Rachel and Leah<\/em>, Jacob’s two wives, were the mothers of Israel. • <em>Ephrathah:<\/em> See study note on 1:2.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:11<\/strong> <em>Rachel and Leah<\/em>, Jacob’s two wives, were the mothers of Israel. • <em>Ephrathah:<\/em> See study note on 1:2.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:11 Rachel and Leah, Jacob’s two wives, were the mothers of Israel. • Ephrathah: See study note on 1:2.","summary_en":"4:11 Rachel and Leah, Jacob’s two wives, were the mothers of Israel. • Ephrathah: See study note on 1:2.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73650,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:11","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:11<\/strong> <em>Rachel and Leah<\/em>, Jacob’s two wives, were the mothers of Israel. • <em>Ephrathah:<\/em> See study note on 1:2.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:11<\/strong> <em>Rachel and Leah<\/em>, Jacob’s two wives, were the mothers of Israel. • <em>Ephrathah:<\/em> See study note on 1:2.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:11 Rachel and Leah, Jacob’s two wives, were the mothers of Israel. • Ephrathah: See study note on 1:2.","summary_en":"4:11 Rachel and Leah, Jacob’s two wives, were the mothers of Israel. • Ephrathah: See study note on 1:2.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101276,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:11","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:11<\/strong> <em>Rachel and Leah<\/em>, Jacob’s two wives, were the mothers of Israel. • <em>Ephrathah:<\/em> See study note on 1:2.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:11<\/strong> <em>Rachel and Leah<\/em>, Jacob’s two wives, were the mothers of Israel. • <em>Ephrathah:<\/em> See study note on 1:2.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:11 Rachel and Leah, Jacob’s two wives, were the mothers of Israel. • Ephrathah: See study note on 1:2.","summary_en":"4:11 Rachel and Leah, Jacob’s two wives, were the mothers of Israel. • Ephrathah: See study note on 1:2.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128902,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:11","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:11<\/strong> <em>Rachel and Leah<\/em>, Jacob’s two wives, were the mothers of Israel. • <em>Ephrathah:<\/em> See study note on 1:2.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:11<\/strong> <em>Rachel and Leah<\/em>, Jacob’s two wives, were the mothers of Israel. • <em>Ephrathah:<\/em> See study note on 1:2.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:11 Rachel and Leah, Jacob’s two wives, were the mothers of Israel. • Ephrathah: See study note on 1:2.","summary_en":"4:11 Rachel and Leah, Jacob’s two wives, were the mothers of Israel. • Ephrathah: See study note on 1:2.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":59695,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Human Sexuality","title_en":"Human Sexuality","content_ro":"<h3>Human Sexuality<\/h3>\n<p>When God created the first human beings in his own image, he created them as sexual beings, male and female (Gen 1:27). Through their sexuality, they were to fill and govern the world (1:28) and provide intimate companionship for one another in marriage (2:18-25). Male and female sexuality is central to what it means to be human and is included in God’s declaration of creation as “very good” (1:31).<\/p>\n<p>Sexual intimacy united the first man and woman as one, an effect that sexual intimacy continues to have. Since biblical sexuality is not just physical but has the total person in view, it validates sexual relations only as part of the partners’ permanent mutual commitment to each other’s ultimate good. The Bible speaks of engaging in sexual intercourse as literally “knowing” another person intimately (see study note on Gen 4:1). Since Creation, God’s intended context for sexual activity has been the intimate union of marriage—namely, a permanent and loving heterosexual commitment (Gen 1:27-28; 2:23-24). The sexual relationship cements the marriage bond in an intimacy that may result in reproduction and can continue even when reproduction is no longer possible.<\/p>\n<p>Although sexuality was created before sin, it did not emerge unscathed from human rebellion. Sexuality is a powerful force that is easily corrupted if not carefully channeled (see Lev 18; 1 Thes 4:3-8). Sexual intimacy apart from marital commitment perverts the order that God intended for creation. Incest, for example, violates sexual boundaries (see Lev 18:7-18), collapses family structures (see Gen 19:30-38), and fragments the community. Whereas perverted sexuality causes much harm, tears the community down (see Gen 38:1-30; 39:7-9; Judg 19–20), and exalts the individual (see 2 Sam 13:11-14), biblical sexuality builds up the sexual partners and the community.<\/p>\n<p>Human sexuality has been damaged through our fall into sin (Gen 3), but God has redeemed it through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (see 1 Cor 6:12-20; Eph 5:31-33). He restores sexual wholeness in those who trust his work in their lives by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 6:9-11, 15-20; 1 Thes 4:1-8). Those who commit their sexuality to Christ’s work in their lives can serve as a testament to others of God’s love for his people (Eph 5:25-33).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:27-28; 2:18-25; Lev 18:1-30; Deut 22:13-29; Ruth 4:11-13; 2 Sam 11:2-27; Ps 127:3-5; Eccl 2:8-11; Song 1:8–8:14; Mal 2:15-16; Matt 19:3-12; 1 Cor 6:12–7:40; Eph 5:31-33; 1 Thes 4:3-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Human Sexuality<\/h3>\n<p>When God created the first human beings in his own image, he created them as sexual beings, male and female (Gen 1:27). Through their sexuality, they were to fill and govern the world (1:28) and provide intimate companionship for one another in marriage (2:18-25). Male and female sexuality is central to what it means to be human and is included in God’s declaration of creation as “very good” (1:31).<\/p>\n<p>Sexual intimacy united the first man and woman as one, an effect that sexual intimacy continues to have. Since biblical sexuality is not just physical but has the total person in view, it validates sexual relations only as part of the partners’ permanent mutual commitment to each other’s ultimate good. The Bible speaks of engaging in sexual intercourse as literally “knowing” another person intimately (see study note on Gen 4:1). Since Creation, God’s intended context for sexual activity has been the intimate union of marriage—namely, a permanent and loving heterosexual commitment (Gen 1:27-28; 2:23-24). The sexual relationship cements the marriage bond in an intimacy that may result in reproduction and can continue even when reproduction is no longer possible.<\/p>\n<p>Although sexuality was created before sin, it did not emerge unscathed from human rebellion. Sexuality is a powerful force that is easily corrupted if not carefully channeled (see Lev 18; 1 Thes 4:3-8). Sexual intimacy apart from marital commitment perverts the order that God intended for creation. Incest, for example, violates sexual boundaries (see Lev 18:7-18), collapses family structures (see Gen 19:30-38), and fragments the community. Whereas perverted sexuality causes much harm, tears the community down (see Gen 38:1-30; 39:7-9; Judg 19–20), and exalts the individual (see 2 Sam 13:11-14), biblical sexuality builds up the sexual partners and the community.<\/p>\n<p>Human sexuality has been damaged through our fall into sin (Gen 3), but God has redeemed it through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (see 1 Cor 6:12-20; Eph 5:31-33). He restores sexual wholeness in those who trust his work in their lives by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 6:9-11, 15-20; 1 Thes 4:1-8). Those who commit their sexuality to Christ’s work in their lives can serve as a testament to others of God’s love for his people (Eph 5:25-33).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:27-28; 2:18-25; Lev 18:1-30; Deut 22:13-29; Ruth 4:11-13; 2 Sam 11:2-27; Ps 127:3-5; Eccl 2:8-11; Song 1:8–8:14; Mal 2:15-16; Matt 19:3-12; 1 Cor 6:12–7:40; Eph 5:31-33; 1 Thes 4:3-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Human Sexuality When God created the first human beings in his own image, he created them as sexual beings, male and female (Gen 1:27). Through their sexuality, they were to fill and govern the world (1:28) and provide intimate companionship for one another in marriage (2:18-25). Male and female sexuality is central to what it means to be human and is included in God’s declaration of creation as “very good” (1:31). Sexual intimacy united the first man and woman as one, an effect that sexual i...","summary_en":"Human Sexuality When God created the first human beings in his own image, he created them as sexual beings, male and female (Gen 1:27). Through their sexuality, they were to fill and govern the world (1:28) and provide intimate companionship for one another in marriage (2:18-25). Male and female sexuality is central to what it means to be human and is included in God’s declaration of creation as “very good” (1:31). Sexual intimacy united the first man and woman as one, an effect that sexual i...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87321,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Human Sexuality","title_en":"Human Sexuality","content_ro":"<h3>Human Sexuality<\/h3>\n<p>When God created the first human beings in his own image, he created them as sexual beings, male and female (Gen 1:27). Through their sexuality, they were to fill and govern the world (1:28) and provide intimate companionship for one another in marriage (2:18-25). Male and female sexuality is central to what it means to be human and is included in God’s declaration of creation as “very good” (1:31).<\/p>\n<p>Sexual intimacy united the first man and woman as one, an effect that sexual intimacy continues to have. Since biblical sexuality is not just physical but has the total person in view, it validates sexual relations only as part of the partners’ permanent mutual commitment to each other’s ultimate good. The Bible speaks of engaging in sexual intercourse as literally “knowing” another person intimately (see study note on Gen 4:1). Since Creation, God’s intended context for sexual activity has been the intimate union of marriage—namely, a permanent and loving heterosexual commitment (Gen 1:27-28; 2:23-24). The sexual relationship cements the marriage bond in an intimacy that may result in reproduction and can continue even when reproduction is no longer possible.<\/p>\n<p>Although sexuality was created before sin, it did not emerge unscathed from human rebellion. Sexuality is a powerful force that is easily corrupted if not carefully channeled (see Lev 18; 1 Thes 4:3-8). Sexual intimacy apart from marital commitment perverts the order that God intended for creation. Incest, for example, violates sexual boundaries (see Lev 18:7-18), collapses family structures (see Gen 19:30-38), and fragments the community. Whereas perverted sexuality causes much harm, tears the community down (see Gen 38:1-30; 39:7-9; Judg 19–20), and exalts the individual (see 2 Sam 13:11-14), biblical sexuality builds up the sexual partners and the community.<\/p>\n<p>Human sexuality has been damaged through our fall into sin (Gen 3), but God has redeemed it through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (see 1 Cor 6:12-20; Eph 5:31-33). He restores sexual wholeness in those who trust his work in their lives by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 6:9-11, 15-20; 1 Thes 4:1-8). Those who commit their sexuality to Christ’s work in their lives can serve as a testament to others of God’s love for his people (Eph 5:25-33).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:27-28; 2:18-25; Lev 18:1-30; Deut 22:13-29; Ruth 4:11-13; 2 Sam 11:2-27; Ps 127:3-5; Eccl 2:8-11; Song 1:8–8:14; Mal 2:15-16; Matt 19:3-12; 1 Cor 6:12–7:40; Eph 5:31-33; 1 Thes 4:3-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Human Sexuality<\/h3>\n<p>When God created the first human beings in his own image, he created them as sexual beings, male and female (Gen 1:27). Through their sexuality, they were to fill and govern the world (1:28) and provide intimate companionship for one another in marriage (2:18-25). Male and female sexuality is central to what it means to be human and is included in God’s declaration of creation as “very good” (1:31).<\/p>\n<p>Sexual intimacy united the first man and woman as one, an effect that sexual intimacy continues to have. Since biblical sexuality is not just physical but has the total person in view, it validates sexual relations only as part of the partners’ permanent mutual commitment to each other’s ultimate good. The Bible speaks of engaging in sexual intercourse as literally “knowing” another person intimately (see study note on Gen 4:1). Since Creation, God’s intended context for sexual activity has been the intimate union of marriage—namely, a permanent and loving heterosexual commitment (Gen 1:27-28; 2:23-24). The sexual relationship cements the marriage bond in an intimacy that may result in reproduction and can continue even when reproduction is no longer possible.<\/p>\n<p>Although sexuality was created before sin, it did not emerge unscathed from human rebellion. Sexuality is a powerful force that is easily corrupted if not carefully channeled (see Lev 18; 1 Thes 4:3-8). Sexual intimacy apart from marital commitment perverts the order that God intended for creation. Incest, for example, violates sexual boundaries (see Lev 18:7-18), collapses family structures (see Gen 19:30-38), and fragments the community. Whereas perverted sexuality causes much harm, tears the community down (see Gen 38:1-30; 39:7-9; Judg 19–20), and exalts the individual (see 2 Sam 13:11-14), biblical sexuality builds up the sexual partners and the community.<\/p>\n<p>Human sexuality has been damaged through our fall into sin (Gen 3), but God has redeemed it through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (see 1 Cor 6:12-20; Eph 5:31-33). He restores sexual wholeness in those who trust his work in their lives by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 6:9-11, 15-20; 1 Thes 4:1-8). Those who commit their sexuality to Christ’s work in their lives can serve as a testament to others of God’s love for his people (Eph 5:25-33).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:27-28; 2:18-25; Lev 18:1-30; Deut 22:13-29; Ruth 4:11-13; 2 Sam 11:2-27; Ps 127:3-5; Eccl 2:8-11; Song 1:8–8:14; Mal 2:15-16; Matt 19:3-12; 1 Cor 6:12–7:40; Eph 5:31-33; 1 Thes 4:3-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Human Sexuality When God created the first human beings in his own image, he created them as sexual beings, male and female (Gen 1:27). Through their sexuality, they were to fill and govern the world (1:28) and provide intimate companionship for one another in marriage (2:18-25). Male and female sexuality is central to what it means to be human and is included in God’s declaration of creation as “very good” (1:31). Sexual intimacy united the first man and woman as one, an effect that sexual i...","summary_en":"Human Sexuality When God created the first human beings in his own image, he created them as sexual beings, male and female (Gen 1:27). Through their sexuality, they were to fill and govern the world (1:28) and provide intimate companionship for one another in marriage (2:18-25). Male and female sexuality is central to what it means to be human and is included in God’s declaration of creation as “very good” (1:31). Sexual intimacy united the first man and woman as one, an effect that sexual i...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":114947,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Human Sexuality","title_en":"Human Sexuality","content_ro":"<h3>Human Sexuality<\/h3>\n<p>When God created the first human beings in his own image, he created them as sexual beings, male and female (Gen 1:27). Through their sexuality, they were to fill and govern the world (1:28) and provide intimate companionship for one another in marriage (2:18-25). Male and female sexuality is central to what it means to be human and is included in God’s declaration of creation as “very good” (1:31).<\/p>\n<p>Sexual intimacy united the first man and woman as one, an effect that sexual intimacy continues to have. Since biblical sexuality is not just physical but has the total person in view, it validates sexual relations only as part of the partners’ permanent mutual commitment to each other’s ultimate good. The Bible speaks of engaging in sexual intercourse as literally “knowing” another person intimately (see study note on Gen 4:1). Since Creation, God’s intended context for sexual activity has been the intimate union of marriage—namely, a permanent and loving heterosexual commitment (Gen 1:27-28; 2:23-24). The sexual relationship cements the marriage bond in an intimacy that may result in reproduction and can continue even when reproduction is no longer possible.<\/p>\n<p>Although sexuality was created before sin, it did not emerge unscathed from human rebellion. Sexuality is a powerful force that is easily corrupted if not carefully channeled (see Lev 18; 1 Thes 4:3-8). Sexual intimacy apart from marital commitment perverts the order that God intended for creation. Incest, for example, violates sexual boundaries (see Lev 18:7-18), collapses family structures (see Gen 19:30-38), and fragments the community. Whereas perverted sexuality causes much harm, tears the community down (see Gen 38:1-30; 39:7-9; Judg 19–20), and exalts the individual (see 2 Sam 13:11-14), biblical sexuality builds up the sexual partners and the community.<\/p>\n<p>Human sexuality has been damaged through our fall into sin (Gen 3), but God has redeemed it through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (see 1 Cor 6:12-20; Eph 5:31-33). He restores sexual wholeness in those who trust his work in their lives by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 6:9-11, 15-20; 1 Thes 4:1-8). Those who commit their sexuality to Christ’s work in their lives can serve as a testament to others of God’s love for his people (Eph 5:25-33).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:27-28; 2:18-25; Lev 18:1-30; Deut 22:13-29; Ruth 4:11-13; 2 Sam 11:2-27; Ps 127:3-5; Eccl 2:8-11; Song 1:8–8:14; Mal 2:15-16; Matt 19:3-12; 1 Cor 6:12–7:40; Eph 5:31-33; 1 Thes 4:3-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Human Sexuality<\/h3>\n<p>When God created the first human beings in his own image, he created them as sexual beings, male and female (Gen 1:27). Through their sexuality, they were to fill and govern the world (1:28) and provide intimate companionship for one another in marriage (2:18-25). Male and female sexuality is central to what it means to be human and is included in God’s declaration of creation as “very good” (1:31).<\/p>\n<p>Sexual intimacy united the first man and woman as one, an effect that sexual intimacy continues to have. Since biblical sexuality is not just physical but has the total person in view, it validates sexual relations only as part of the partners’ permanent mutual commitment to each other’s ultimate good. The Bible speaks of engaging in sexual intercourse as literally “knowing” another person intimately (see study note on Gen 4:1). Since Creation, God’s intended context for sexual activity has been the intimate union of marriage—namely, a permanent and loving heterosexual commitment (Gen 1:27-28; 2:23-24). The sexual relationship cements the marriage bond in an intimacy that may result in reproduction and can continue even when reproduction is no longer possible.<\/p>\n<p>Although sexuality was created before sin, it did not emerge unscathed from human rebellion. Sexuality is a powerful force that is easily corrupted if not carefully channeled (see Lev 18; 1 Thes 4:3-8). Sexual intimacy apart from marital commitment perverts the order that God intended for creation. Incest, for example, violates sexual boundaries (see Lev 18:7-18), collapses family structures (see Gen 19:30-38), and fragments the community. Whereas perverted sexuality causes much harm, tears the community down (see Gen 38:1-30; 39:7-9; Judg 19–20), and exalts the individual (see 2 Sam 13:11-14), biblical sexuality builds up the sexual partners and the community.<\/p>\n<p>Human sexuality has been damaged through our fall into sin (Gen 3), but God has redeemed it through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (see 1 Cor 6:12-20; Eph 5:31-33). He restores sexual wholeness in those who trust his work in their lives by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 6:9-11, 15-20; 1 Thes 4:1-8). Those who commit their sexuality to Christ’s work in their lives can serve as a testament to others of God’s love for his people (Eph 5:25-33).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:27-28; 2:18-25; Lev 18:1-30; Deut 22:13-29; Ruth 4:11-13; 2 Sam 11:2-27; Ps 127:3-5; Eccl 2:8-11; Song 1:8–8:14; Mal 2:15-16; Matt 19:3-12; 1 Cor 6:12–7:40; Eph 5:31-33; 1 Thes 4:3-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Human Sexuality When God created the first human beings in his own image, he created them as sexual beings, male and female (Gen 1:27). Through their sexuality, they were to fill and govern the world (1:28) and provide intimate companionship for one another in marriage (2:18-25). Male and female sexuality is central to what it means to be human and is included in God’s declaration of creation as “very good” (1:31). Sexual intimacy united the first man and woman as one, an effect that sexual i...","summary_en":"Human Sexuality When God created the first human beings in his own image, he created them as sexual beings, male and female (Gen 1:27). Through their sexuality, they were to fill and govern the world (1:28) and provide intimate companionship for one another in marriage (2:18-25). Male and female sexuality is central to what it means to be human and is included in God’s declaration of creation as “very good” (1:31). Sexual intimacy united the first man and woman as one, an effect that sexual i...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":142573,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Human Sexuality","title_en":"Human Sexuality","content_ro":"<h3>Human Sexuality<\/h3>\n<p>When God created the first human beings in his own image, he created them as sexual beings, male and female (Gen 1:27). Through their sexuality, they were to fill and govern the world (1:28) and provide intimate companionship for one another in marriage (2:18-25). Male and female sexuality is central to what it means to be human and is included in God’s declaration of creation as “very good” (1:31).<\/p>\n<p>Sexual intimacy united the first man and woman as one, an effect that sexual intimacy continues to have. Since biblical sexuality is not just physical but has the total person in view, it validates sexual relations only as part of the partners’ permanent mutual commitment to each other’s ultimate good. The Bible speaks of engaging in sexual intercourse as literally “knowing” another person intimately (see study note on Gen 4:1). Since Creation, God’s intended context for sexual activity has been the intimate union of marriage—namely, a permanent and loving heterosexual commitment (Gen 1:27-28; 2:23-24). The sexual relationship cements the marriage bond in an intimacy that may result in reproduction and can continue even when reproduction is no longer possible.<\/p>\n<p>Although sexuality was created before sin, it did not emerge unscathed from human rebellion. Sexuality is a powerful force that is easily corrupted if not carefully channeled (see Lev 18; 1 Thes 4:3-8). Sexual intimacy apart from marital commitment perverts the order that God intended for creation. Incest, for example, violates sexual boundaries (see Lev 18:7-18), collapses family structures (see Gen 19:30-38), and fragments the community. Whereas perverted sexuality causes much harm, tears the community down (see Gen 38:1-30; 39:7-9; Judg 19–20), and exalts the individual (see 2 Sam 13:11-14), biblical sexuality builds up the sexual partners and the community.<\/p>\n<p>Human sexuality has been damaged through our fall into sin (Gen 3), but God has redeemed it through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (see 1 Cor 6:12-20; Eph 5:31-33). He restores sexual wholeness in those who trust his work in their lives by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 6:9-11, 15-20; 1 Thes 4:1-8). Those who commit their sexuality to Christ’s work in their lives can serve as a testament to others of God’s love for his people (Eph 5:25-33).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:27-28; 2:18-25; Lev 18:1-30; Deut 22:13-29; Ruth 4:11-13; 2 Sam 11:2-27; Ps 127:3-5; Eccl 2:8-11; Song 1:8–8:14; Mal 2:15-16; Matt 19:3-12; 1 Cor 6:12–7:40; Eph 5:31-33; 1 Thes 4:3-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Human Sexuality<\/h3>\n<p>When God created the first human beings in his own image, he created them as sexual beings, male and female (Gen 1:27). Through their sexuality, they were to fill and govern the world (1:28) and provide intimate companionship for one another in marriage (2:18-25). Male and female sexuality is central to what it means to be human and is included in God’s declaration of creation as “very good” (1:31).<\/p>\n<p>Sexual intimacy united the first man and woman as one, an effect that sexual intimacy continues to have. Since biblical sexuality is not just physical but has the total person in view, it validates sexual relations only as part of the partners’ permanent mutual commitment to each other’s ultimate good. The Bible speaks of engaging in sexual intercourse as literally “knowing” another person intimately (see study note on Gen 4:1). Since Creation, God’s intended context for sexual activity has been the intimate union of marriage—namely, a permanent and loving heterosexual commitment (Gen 1:27-28; 2:23-24). The sexual relationship cements the marriage bond in an intimacy that may result in reproduction and can continue even when reproduction is no longer possible.<\/p>\n<p>Although sexuality was created before sin, it did not emerge unscathed from human rebellion. Sexuality is a powerful force that is easily corrupted if not carefully channeled (see Lev 18; 1 Thes 4:3-8). Sexual intimacy apart from marital commitment perverts the order that God intended for creation. Incest, for example, violates sexual boundaries (see Lev 18:7-18), collapses family structures (see Gen 19:30-38), and fragments the community. Whereas perverted sexuality causes much harm, tears the community down (see Gen 38:1-30; 39:7-9; Judg 19–20), and exalts the individual (see 2 Sam 13:11-14), biblical sexuality builds up the sexual partners and the community.<\/p>\n<p>Human sexuality has been damaged through our fall into sin (Gen 3), but God has redeemed it through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (see 1 Cor 6:12-20; Eph 5:31-33). He restores sexual wholeness in those who trust his work in their lives by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 6:9-11, 15-20; 1 Thes 4:1-8). Those who commit their sexuality to Christ’s work in their lives can serve as a testament to others of God’s love for his people (Eph 5:25-33).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 1:27-28; 2:18-25; Lev 18:1-30; Deut 22:13-29; Ruth 4:11-13; 2 Sam 11:2-27; Ps 127:3-5; Eccl 2:8-11; Song 1:8–8:14; Mal 2:15-16; Matt 19:3-12; 1 Cor 6:12–7:40; Eph 5:31-33; 1 Thes 4:3-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Human Sexuality When God created the first human beings in his own image, he created them as sexual beings, male and female (Gen 1:27). Through their sexuality, they were to fill and govern the world (1:28) and provide intimate companionship for one another in marriage (2:18-25). Male and female sexuality is central to what it means to be human and is included in God’s declaration of creation as “very good” (1:31). Sexual intimacy united the first man and woman as one, an effect that sexual i...","summary_en":"Human Sexuality When God created the first human beings in his own image, he created them as sexual beings, male and female (Gen 1:27). Through their sexuality, they were to fill and govern the world (1:28) and provide intimate companionship for one another in marriage (2:18-25). Male and female sexuality is central to what it means to be human and is included in God’s declaration of creation as “very good” (1:31). Sexual intimacy united the first man and woman as one, an effect that sexual i...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":40778,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judah","title_en":"Judah","content_ro":"<h3>Judah<\/h3>\n<p>Judah is remembered most often as the ancestor of King David and of Jesus Christ. Despite his birth as a middle child and his sins as an adult (Gen 38), God chose Judah to carry the line of King David (1 Chr 2:1-17; 3:1-24) and of the Messiah (Gen 49:8-12; Matt 1:1-16; Luke 3:23-34).<\/p>\n<p>Judah was the fourth of Jacob’s twelve sons (Gen 35:23; 1 Chr 2:1). Leah, overjoyed to have borne her fourth son, named him Judah, meaning “praise” (Gen 29:35). Judah fathered five sons: Er, Onan, and Shelah by Bathshua, a woman from Canaan (Gen 38:1-5; 1 Chr 2:3); and the twins, Perez and Zerah, by his daughter-in-law Tamar (Gen 38:27-30; 1 Chr 2:4). God killed his first two sons, Er and Onan, in Canaan for disobedience (Gen 46:12). Judah eventually settled his family in Egypt with his father and brothers (Exod 1:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Though reckless in his behavior with Tamar (Gen 38:6-30), Judah took personal responsibility for Benjamin’s safety in Egypt and interceded with Joseph for his brothers (44:14-34). When Jacob gave his dying blessing, he granted Judah a position of leadership; the future kings of Israel would come through Judah’s offspring (see 49:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:35; 37:26-27; 38:1-30; 43:1-10; 44:14-34; 46:28; 49:8-12; Ruth 4:12; 1 Chr 2:3-4; 5:2; Ps 108:8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judah<\/h3>\n<p>Judah is remembered most often as the ancestor of King David and of Jesus Christ. Despite his birth as a middle child and his sins as an adult (Gen 38), God chose Judah to carry the line of King David (1 Chr 2:1-17; 3:1-24) and of the Messiah (Gen 49:8-12; Matt 1:1-16; Luke 3:23-34).<\/p>\n<p>Judah was the fourth of Jacob’s twelve sons (Gen 35:23; 1 Chr 2:1). Leah, overjoyed to have borne her fourth son, named him Judah, meaning “praise” (Gen 29:35). Judah fathered five sons: Er, Onan, and Shelah by Bathshua, a woman from Canaan (Gen 38:1-5; 1 Chr 2:3); and the twins, Perez and Zerah, by his daughter-in-law Tamar (Gen 38:27-30; 1 Chr 2:4). God killed his first two sons, Er and Onan, in Canaan for disobedience (Gen 46:12). Judah eventually settled his family in Egypt with his father and brothers (Exod 1:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Though reckless in his behavior with Tamar (Gen 38:6-30), Judah took personal responsibility for Benjamin’s safety in Egypt and interceded with Joseph for his brothers (44:14-34). When Jacob gave his dying blessing, he granted Judah a position of leadership; the future kings of Israel would come through Judah’s offspring (see 49:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:35; 37:26-27; 38:1-30; 43:1-10; 44:14-34; 46:28; 49:8-12; Ruth 4:12; 1 Chr 2:3-4; 5:2; Ps 108:8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judah Judah is remembered most often as the ancestor of King David and of Jesus Christ. Despite his birth as a middle child and his sins as an adult (Gen 38), God chose Judah to carry the line of King David (1 Chr 2:1-17; 3:1-24) and of the Messiah (Gen 49:8-12; Matt 1:1-16; Luke 3:23-34). Judah was the fourth of Jacob’s twelve sons (Gen 35:23; 1 Chr 2:1). Leah, overjoyed to have borne her fourth son, named him Judah, meaning “praise” (Gen 29:35). Judah fathered five sons: Er, Onan, and Shela...","summary_en":"Judah Judah is remembered most often as the ancestor of King David and of Jesus Christ. Despite his birth as a middle child and his sins as an adult (Gen 38), God chose Judah to carry the line of King David (1 Chr 2:1-17; 3:1-24) and of the Messiah (Gen 49:8-12; Matt 1:1-16; Luke 3:23-34). Judah was the fourth of Jacob’s twelve sons (Gen 35:23; 1 Chr 2:1). Leah, overjoyed to have borne her fourth son, named him Judah, meaning “praise” (Gen 29:35). Judah fathered five sons: Er, Onan, and Shela...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":68404,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judah","title_en":"Judah","content_ro":"<h3>Judah<\/h3>\n<p>Judah is remembered most often as the ancestor of King David and of Jesus Christ. Despite his birth as a middle child and his sins as an adult (Gen 38), God chose Judah to carry the line of King David (1 Chr 2:1-17; 3:1-24) and of the Messiah (Gen 49:8-12; Matt 1:1-16; Luke 3:23-34).<\/p>\n<p>Judah was the fourth of Jacob’s twelve sons (Gen 35:23; 1 Chr 2:1). Leah, overjoyed to have borne her fourth son, named him Judah, meaning “praise” (Gen 29:35). Judah fathered five sons: Er, Onan, and Shelah by Bathshua, a woman from Canaan (Gen 38:1-5; 1 Chr 2:3); and the twins, Perez and Zerah, by his daughter-in-law Tamar (Gen 38:27-30; 1 Chr 2:4). God killed his first two sons, Er and Onan, in Canaan for disobedience (Gen 46:12). Judah eventually settled his family in Egypt with his father and brothers (Exod 1:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Though reckless in his behavior with Tamar (Gen 38:6-30), Judah took personal responsibility for Benjamin’s safety in Egypt and interceded with Joseph for his brothers (44:14-34). When Jacob gave his dying blessing, he granted Judah a position of leadership; the future kings of Israel would come through Judah’s offspring (see 49:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:35; 37:26-27; 38:1-30; 43:1-10; 44:14-34; 46:28; 49:8-12; Ruth 4:12; 1 Chr 2:3-4; 5:2; Ps 108:8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judah<\/h3>\n<p>Judah is remembered most often as the ancestor of King David and of Jesus Christ. Despite his birth as a middle child and his sins as an adult (Gen 38), God chose Judah to carry the line of King David (1 Chr 2:1-17; 3:1-24) and of the Messiah (Gen 49:8-12; Matt 1:1-16; Luke 3:23-34).<\/p>\n<p>Judah was the fourth of Jacob’s twelve sons (Gen 35:23; 1 Chr 2:1). Leah, overjoyed to have borne her fourth son, named him Judah, meaning “praise” (Gen 29:35). Judah fathered five sons: Er, Onan, and Shelah by Bathshua, a woman from Canaan (Gen 38:1-5; 1 Chr 2:3); and the twins, Perez and Zerah, by his daughter-in-law Tamar (Gen 38:27-30; 1 Chr 2:4). God killed his first two sons, Er and Onan, in Canaan for disobedience (Gen 46:12). Judah eventually settled his family in Egypt with his father and brothers (Exod 1:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Though reckless in his behavior with Tamar (Gen 38:6-30), Judah took personal responsibility for Benjamin’s safety in Egypt and interceded with Joseph for his brothers (44:14-34). When Jacob gave his dying blessing, he granted Judah a position of leadership; the future kings of Israel would come through Judah’s offspring (see 49:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:35; 37:26-27; 38:1-30; 43:1-10; 44:14-34; 46:28; 49:8-12; Ruth 4:12; 1 Chr 2:3-4; 5:2; Ps 108:8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judah Judah is remembered most often as the ancestor of King David and of Jesus Christ. Despite his birth as a middle child and his sins as an adult (Gen 38), God chose Judah to carry the line of King David (1 Chr 2:1-17; 3:1-24) and of the Messiah (Gen 49:8-12; Matt 1:1-16; Luke 3:23-34). Judah was the fourth of Jacob’s twelve sons (Gen 35:23; 1 Chr 2:1). Leah, overjoyed to have borne her fourth son, named him Judah, meaning “praise” (Gen 29:35). Judah fathered five sons: Er, Onan, and Shela...","summary_en":"Judah Judah is remembered most often as the ancestor of King David and of Jesus Christ. Despite his birth as a middle child and his sins as an adult (Gen 38), God chose Judah to carry the line of King David (1 Chr 2:1-17; 3:1-24) and of the Messiah (Gen 49:8-12; Matt 1:1-16; Luke 3:23-34). Judah was the fourth of Jacob’s twelve sons (Gen 35:23; 1 Chr 2:1). Leah, overjoyed to have borne her fourth son, named him Judah, meaning “praise” (Gen 29:35). Judah fathered five sons: Er, Onan, and Shela...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":96030,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judah","title_en":"Judah","content_ro":"<h3>Judah<\/h3>\n<p>Judah is remembered most often as the ancestor of King David and of Jesus Christ. Despite his birth as a middle child and his sins as an adult (Gen 38), God chose Judah to carry the line of King David (1 Chr 2:1-17; 3:1-24) and of the Messiah (Gen 49:8-12; Matt 1:1-16; Luke 3:23-34).<\/p>\n<p>Judah was the fourth of Jacob’s twelve sons (Gen 35:23; 1 Chr 2:1). Leah, overjoyed to have borne her fourth son, named him Judah, meaning “praise” (Gen 29:35). Judah fathered five sons: Er, Onan, and Shelah by Bathshua, a woman from Canaan (Gen 38:1-5; 1 Chr 2:3); and the twins, Perez and Zerah, by his daughter-in-law Tamar (Gen 38:27-30; 1 Chr 2:4). God killed his first two sons, Er and Onan, in Canaan for disobedience (Gen 46:12). Judah eventually settled his family in Egypt with his father and brothers (Exod 1:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Though reckless in his behavior with Tamar (Gen 38:6-30), Judah took personal responsibility for Benjamin’s safety in Egypt and interceded with Joseph for his brothers (44:14-34). When Jacob gave his dying blessing, he granted Judah a position of leadership; the future kings of Israel would come through Judah’s offspring (see 49:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:35; 37:26-27; 38:1-30; 43:1-10; 44:14-34; 46:28; 49:8-12; Ruth 4:12; 1 Chr 2:3-4; 5:2; Ps 108:8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judah<\/h3>\n<p>Judah is remembered most often as the ancestor of King David and of Jesus Christ. Despite his birth as a middle child and his sins as an adult (Gen 38), God chose Judah to carry the line of King David (1 Chr 2:1-17; 3:1-24) and of the Messiah (Gen 49:8-12; Matt 1:1-16; Luke 3:23-34).<\/p>\n<p>Judah was the fourth of Jacob’s twelve sons (Gen 35:23; 1 Chr 2:1). Leah, overjoyed to have borne her fourth son, named him Judah, meaning “praise” (Gen 29:35). Judah fathered five sons: Er, Onan, and Shelah by Bathshua, a woman from Canaan (Gen 38:1-5; 1 Chr 2:3); and the twins, Perez and Zerah, by his daughter-in-law Tamar (Gen 38:27-30; 1 Chr 2:4). God killed his first two sons, Er and Onan, in Canaan for disobedience (Gen 46:12). Judah eventually settled his family in Egypt with his father and brothers (Exod 1:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Though reckless in his behavior with Tamar (Gen 38:6-30), Judah took personal responsibility for Benjamin’s safety in Egypt and interceded with Joseph for his brothers (44:14-34). When Jacob gave his dying blessing, he granted Judah a position of leadership; the future kings of Israel would come through Judah’s offspring (see 49:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:35; 37:26-27; 38:1-30; 43:1-10; 44:14-34; 46:28; 49:8-12; Ruth 4:12; 1 Chr 2:3-4; 5:2; Ps 108:8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judah Judah is remembered most often as the ancestor of King David and of Jesus Christ. Despite his birth as a middle child and his sins as an adult (Gen 38), God chose Judah to carry the line of King David (1 Chr 2:1-17; 3:1-24) and of the Messiah (Gen 49:8-12; Matt 1:1-16; Luke 3:23-34). Judah was the fourth of Jacob’s twelve sons (Gen 35:23; 1 Chr 2:1). Leah, overjoyed to have borne her fourth son, named him Judah, meaning “praise” (Gen 29:35). Judah fathered five sons: Er, Onan, and Shela...","summary_en":"Judah Judah is remembered most often as the ancestor of King David and of Jesus Christ. Despite his birth as a middle child and his sins as an adult (Gen 38), God chose Judah to carry the line of King David (1 Chr 2:1-17; 3:1-24) and of the Messiah (Gen 49:8-12; Matt 1:1-16; Luke 3:23-34). Judah was the fourth of Jacob’s twelve sons (Gen 35:23; 1 Chr 2:1). Leah, overjoyed to have borne her fourth son, named him Judah, meaning “praise” (Gen 29:35). Judah fathered five sons: Er, Onan, and Shela...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":123656,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Judah","title_en":"Judah","content_ro":"<h3>Judah<\/h3>\n<p>Judah is remembered most often as the ancestor of King David and of Jesus Christ. Despite his birth as a middle child and his sins as an adult (Gen 38), God chose Judah to carry the line of King David (1 Chr 2:1-17; 3:1-24) and of the Messiah (Gen 49:8-12; Matt 1:1-16; Luke 3:23-34).<\/p>\n<p>Judah was the fourth of Jacob’s twelve sons (Gen 35:23; 1 Chr 2:1). Leah, overjoyed to have borne her fourth son, named him Judah, meaning “praise” (Gen 29:35). Judah fathered five sons: Er, Onan, and Shelah by Bathshua, a woman from Canaan (Gen 38:1-5; 1 Chr 2:3); and the twins, Perez and Zerah, by his daughter-in-law Tamar (Gen 38:27-30; 1 Chr 2:4). God killed his first two sons, Er and Onan, in Canaan for disobedience (Gen 46:12). Judah eventually settled his family in Egypt with his father and brothers (Exod 1:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Though reckless in his behavior with Tamar (Gen 38:6-30), Judah took personal responsibility for Benjamin’s safety in Egypt and interceded with Joseph for his brothers (44:14-34). When Jacob gave his dying blessing, he granted Judah a position of leadership; the future kings of Israel would come through Judah’s offspring (see 49:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:35; 37:26-27; 38:1-30; 43:1-10; 44:14-34; 46:28; 49:8-12; Ruth 4:12; 1 Chr 2:3-4; 5:2; Ps 108:8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Judah<\/h3>\n<p>Judah is remembered most often as the ancestor of King David and of Jesus Christ. Despite his birth as a middle child and his sins as an adult (Gen 38), God chose Judah to carry the line of King David (1 Chr 2:1-17; 3:1-24) and of the Messiah (Gen 49:8-12; Matt 1:1-16; Luke 3:23-34).<\/p>\n<p>Judah was the fourth of Jacob’s twelve sons (Gen 35:23; 1 Chr 2:1). Leah, overjoyed to have borne her fourth son, named him Judah, meaning “praise” (Gen 29:35). Judah fathered five sons: Er, Onan, and Shelah by Bathshua, a woman from Canaan (Gen 38:1-5; 1 Chr 2:3); and the twins, Perez and Zerah, by his daughter-in-law Tamar (Gen 38:27-30; 1 Chr 2:4). God killed his first two sons, Er and Onan, in Canaan for disobedience (Gen 46:12). Judah eventually settled his family in Egypt with his father and brothers (Exod 1:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Though reckless in his behavior with Tamar (Gen 38:6-30), Judah took personal responsibility for Benjamin’s safety in Egypt and interceded with Joseph for his brothers (44:14-34). When Jacob gave his dying blessing, he granted Judah a position of leadership; the future kings of Israel would come through Judah’s offspring (see 49:10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:35; 37:26-27; 38:1-30; 43:1-10; 44:14-34; 46:28; 49:8-12; Ruth 4:12; 1 Chr 2:3-4; 5:2; Ps 108:8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Judah Judah is remembered most often as the ancestor of King David and of Jesus Christ. Despite his birth as a middle child and his sins as an adult (Gen 38), God chose Judah to carry the line of King David (1 Chr 2:1-17; 3:1-24) and of the Messiah (Gen 49:8-12; Matt 1:1-16; Luke 3:23-34). Judah was the fourth of Jacob’s twelve sons (Gen 35:23; 1 Chr 2:1). Leah, overjoyed to have borne her fourth son, named him Judah, meaning “praise” (Gen 29:35). Judah fathered five sons: Er, Onan, and Shela...","summary_en":"Judah Judah is remembered most often as the ancestor of King David and of Jesus Christ. Despite his birth as a middle child and his sins as an adult (Gen 38), God chose Judah to carry the line of King David (1 Chr 2:1-17; 3:1-24) and of the Messiah (Gen 49:8-12; Matt 1:1-16; Luke 3:23-34). Judah was the fourth of Jacob’s twelve sons (Gen 35:23; 1 Chr 2:1). Leah, overjoyed to have borne her fourth son, named him Judah, meaning “praise” (Gen 29:35). Judah fathered five sons: Er, Onan, and Shela...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21004,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Judah (Person)","title_en":"Judah (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>JUDAH (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Fourth of Jacob’s 12 sons (Gn 35:23; 1 Chr 2:1) and the fourth son born to Jacob by Leah, who, overjoyed with the thought of bearing Jacob another son, named him Judah, meaning “praise” (Gn 29:35). Judah fathered five sons: Er, Onan, and Shelah by Bathshua the Canaanitess (Gn 38:3-5; 1 Chr 2:3); and the twins Perez and Zerah by Tamar, his daughter-in-law (Gn 38:29-30; 1 Chr 2:4). He eventually settled his family in Egypt with his father and brothers (Ex 1:2), although his first two sons, Er and Onan, were divinely killed in Canaan for their disobedience (Gn 46:12). Judah became the founder of one of Israel’s 12 tribes (Nm 1:26-27).<\/li>\n<p>Though reckless in his behavior with Tamar (Gn 38:6-30), Judah showed firm resolve in taking personal responsibility for Benjamin’s safety in Egypt and acting as intercessor for his brothers before Joseph (44:14-18). At the time of Jacob’s blessing, Judah was granted the birthright privileges of the firstborn; the leadership of Jacob’s family would come through Judah’s seed, as would the promised Messiah of Abraham’s covenant (49:8-12). Later, Judah’s family was praised at the time of Ruth’s engagement to Boaz (Ru 4:12), and both the Davidic lines of kings (1 Chr 2:1-15; 3:1-24) and Jesus Christ’s ancestors traced their descent from Judah (Mt 1:2-3; Lk 3:33).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Judah, Tribe of.<\/p>\n<li>2. Forefather of a family of Levites who assisted Jeshua, the high priest, with rebuilding the temple during the postexilic era (Ezr 3:9, <span>nlt<\/span> mg). He is alternately called Hodaviah in Ezra 2:40 and Hodevah in Nehemiah 7:43. <em>See<\/em> Hodaviah #4.<\/li>\n<li>3. One of the Levites who was encouraged by Ezra to divorce his foreign wife (Ezr 10:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Benjamite, son of Hassenuah, who was second in command over the city of Jerusalem during the days of Nehemiah (Neh 11:9).<\/li>\n<li>5. One of the leaders of the Levites who returned with Zerubbabel and Jeshua to Judah after the exile (Neh 12:8).<\/li>\n<li>6. One of the princes of Judah who participated in the dedication of the Jerusalem wall during the postexilic period (Neh 12:34).<\/li>\n<li>7. One of the priests who played a musical instrument at the dedication of the Jerusalem wall during the days of Nehemiah (Neh 12:36). He is perhaps identical with #5 above.<\/li>\n<li>8. Joseph’s son, father of Simeon and an ancestor of Jesus Christ (Lk 3:30). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>JUDAH (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Fourth of Jacob’s 12 sons (Gn 35:23; 1 Chr 2:1) and the fourth son born to Jacob by Leah, who, overjoyed with the thought of bearing Jacob another son, named him Judah, meaning “praise” (Gn 29:35). Judah fathered five sons: Er, Onan, and Shelah by Bathshua the Canaanitess (Gn 38:3-5; 1 Chr 2:3); and the twins Perez and Zerah by Tamar, his daughter-in-law (Gn 38:29-30; 1 Chr 2:4). He eventually settled his family in Egypt with his father and brothers (Ex 1:2), although his first two sons, Er and Onan, were divinely killed in Canaan for their disobedience (Gn 46:12). Judah became the founder of one of Israel’s 12 tribes (Nm 1:26-27).<\/li>\n<p>Though reckless in his behavior with Tamar (Gn 38:6-30), Judah showed firm resolve in taking personal responsibility for Benjamin’s safety in Egypt and acting as intercessor for his brothers before Joseph (44:14-18). At the time of Jacob’s blessing, Judah was granted the birthright privileges of the firstborn; the leadership of Jacob’s family would come through Judah’s seed, as would the promised Messiah of Abraham’s covenant (49:8-12). Later, Judah’s family was praised at the time of Ruth’s engagement to Boaz (Ru 4:12), and both the Davidic lines of kings (1 Chr 2:1-15; 3:1-24) and Jesus Christ’s ancestors traced their descent from Judah (Mt 1:2-3; Lk 3:33).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Judah, Tribe of.<\/p>\n<li>2. Forefather of a family of Levites who assisted Jeshua, the high priest, with rebuilding the temple during the postexilic era (Ezr 3:9, <span>nlt<\/span> mg). He is alternately called Hodaviah in Ezra 2:40 and Hodevah in Nehemiah 7:43. <em>See<\/em> Hodaviah #4.<\/li>\n<li>3. One of the Levites who was encouraged by Ezra to divorce his foreign wife (Ezr 10:23).<\/li>\n<li>4. Benjamite, son of Hassenuah, who was second in command over the city of Jerusalem during the days of Nehemiah (Neh 11:9).<\/li>\n<li>5. One of the leaders of the Levites who returned with Zerubbabel and Jeshua to Judah after the exile (Neh 12:8).<\/li>\n<li>6. One of the princes of Judah who participated in the dedication of the Jerusalem wall during the postexilic period (Neh 12:34).<\/li>\n<li>7. One of the priests who played a musical instrument at the dedication of the Jerusalem wall during the days of Nehemiah (Neh 12:36). He is perhaps identical with #5 above.<\/li>\n<li>8. Joseph’s son, father of Simeon and an ancestor of Jesus Christ (Lk 3:30). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>","summary_ro":"JUDAH (Person) 1. Fourth of Jacob’s 12 sons (Gn 35:23; 1 Chr 2:1) and the fourth son born to Jacob by Leah, who, overjoyed with the thought of bearing Jacob another son, named him Judah, meaning “praise” (Gn 29:35). Judah fathered five sons: Er, Onan, and Shelah by Bathshua the Canaanitess (Gn 38:3-5; 1 Chr 2:3); and the twins Perez and Zerah by Tamar, his daughter-in-law (Gn 38:29-30; 1 Chr 2:4). He eventually settled his family in Egypt with his father and brothers (Ex 1:2), although his fi...","summary_en":"JUDAH (Person) 1. Fourth of Jacob’s 12 sons (Gn 35:23; 1 Chr 2:1) and the fourth son born to Jacob by Leah, who, overjoyed with the thought of bearing Jacob another son, named him Judah, meaning “praise” (Gn 29:35). Judah fathered five sons: Er, Onan, and Shelah by Bathshua the Canaanitess (Gn 38:3-5; 1 Chr 2:3); and the twins Perez and Zerah by Tamar, his daughter-in-law (Gn 38:29-30; 1 Chr 2:4). He eventually settled his family in Egypt with his father and brothers (Ex 1:2), although his fi...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":29594,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Perezite Perez","title_en":"Perezite Perez","content_ro":"<h3>PEREZ, PEREZITE<\/h3>\n<p>Son of Judah whose name is derived from a Hebrew word meaning “he who bursts forth”; his name refers to the manner in which he unexpectedly came first from Tamar’s womb before his twin brother, Zerah (Gn 38:29). He fathered two sons, Hezron and Hamul, and became the ancestral head of the Perezite family (Gn 46:12; Nm 26:20-21; 1 Chr 2:4-5; 4:1). The <span>kjv<\/span> and the Apocrypha translate the name variously as Pharez, Phares, and Pharzite.<\/p>\n<p>Through the descent of his son Hezron, he became the ancestor of David and Jesus Christ (Ru 4:18-22; Mt 1:3; Lk 3:33). The esteem this clan enjoyed in the tribe of Judah is evidenced by the blessing pronounced upon it by the men of Bethlehem (Ru 4:12). A descendant named Jashobeam commanded David’s captains for the first month of each year (1 Chr 27:2-3). Upon the return from captivity in Babylon, 468 Perezites were chosen to live in Jerusalem (1 Chr 9:4; Neh 11:4-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PEREZ, PEREZITE<\/h3>\n<p>Son of Judah whose name is derived from a Hebrew word meaning “he who bursts forth”; his name refers to the manner in which he unexpectedly came first from Tamar’s womb before his twin brother, Zerah (Gn 38:29). He fathered two sons, Hezron and Hamul, and became the ancestral head of the Perezite family (Gn 46:12; Nm 26:20-21; 1 Chr 2:4-5; 4:1). The <span>kjv<\/span> and the Apocrypha translate the name variously as Pharez, Phares, and Pharzite.<\/p>\n<p>Through the descent of his son Hezron, he became the ancestor of David and Jesus Christ (Ru 4:18-22; Mt 1:3; Lk 3:33). The esteem this clan enjoyed in the tribe of Judah is evidenced by the blessing pronounced upon it by the men of Bethlehem (Ru 4:12). A descendant named Jashobeam commanded David’s captains for the first month of each year (1 Chr 27:2-3). Upon the return from captivity in Babylon, 468 Perezites were chosen to live in Jerusalem (1 Chr 9:4; Neh 11:4-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"PEREZ, PEREZITE Son of Judah whose name is derived from a Hebrew word meaning “he who bursts forth”; his name refers to the manner in which he unexpectedly came first from Tamar’s womb before his twin brother, Zerah (Gn 38:29). He fathered two sons, Hezron and Hamul, and became the ancestral head of the Perezite family (Gn 46:12; Nm 26:20-21; 1 Chr 2:4-5; 4:1). The kjv and the Apocrypha translate the name variously as Pharez, Phares, and Pharzite. Through the descent of his son Hezron, he bec...","summary_en":"PEREZ, PEREZITE Son of Judah whose name is derived from a Hebrew word meaning “he who bursts forth”; his name refers to the manner in which he unexpectedly came first from Tamar’s womb before his twin brother, Zerah (Gn 38:29). He fathered two sons, Hezron and Hamul, and became the ancestral head of the Perezite family (Gn 46:12; Nm 26:20-21; 1 Chr 2:4-5; 4:1). The kjv and the Apocrypha translate the name variously as Pharez, Phares, and Pharzite. Through the descent of his son Hezron, he bec...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":36736,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Tamar (Person)","title_en":"Tamar (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>TAMAR (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Wife of Er, the firstborn son of Judah by a Canaanitess. Later, as a widow, Tamar bore two sons to Judah named Perez and Zerah (Gn 38:6-24; 1 Chr 2:4). Tamar preserved the line of Judah through Perez (Ru 4:12), and her name is recorded in the genealogy of Christ (Mt 1:3).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<li>2. Sister of Absalom and the daughter of David by his wife Maacah, the Geshurite. Through deceit, Tamar was seduced by Amnon, her half brother. In vengeance, Absalom, her full brother, had Amnon murdered at Baal-hazor (2 Sm 13; 1 Chr 3:9).<\/li>\n<li>3. Daughter of Absalom who was noted for her beauty (2 Sm 14:27). She perhaps married Uriel of Gibeah and became the mother of Maacah. <em>See<\/em> Maacah, Maachah (Person) #4.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>TAMAR (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Wife of Er, the firstborn son of Judah by a Canaanitess. Later, as a widow, Tamar bore two sons to Judah named Perez and Zerah (Gn 38:6-24; 1 Chr 2:4). Tamar preserved the line of Judah through Perez (Ru 4:12), and her name is recorded in the genealogy of Christ (Mt 1:3).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<li>2. Sister of Absalom and the daughter of David by his wife Maacah, the Geshurite. Through deceit, Tamar was seduced by Amnon, her half brother. In vengeance, Absalom, her full brother, had Amnon murdered at Baal-hazor (2 Sm 13; 1 Chr 3:9).<\/li>\n<li>3. Daughter of Absalom who was noted for her beauty (2 Sm 14:27). She perhaps married Uriel of Gibeah and became the mother of Maacah. <em>See<\/em> Maacah, Maachah (Person) #4.<\/li>","summary_ro":"TAMAR (Person) 1. Wife of Er, the firstborn son of Judah by a Canaanitess. Later, as a widow, Tamar bore two sons to Judah named Perez and Zerah (Gn 38:6-24; 1 Chr 2:4). Tamar preserved the line of Judah through Perez (Ru 4:12), and her name is recorded in the genealogy of Christ (Mt 1:3). See also Genealogy of Jesus Christ. 2. Sister of Absalom and the daughter of David by his wife Maacah, the Geshurite. Through deceit, Tamar was seduced by Amnon, her half brother. In vengeance, Absalom, her...","summary_en":"TAMAR (Person) 1. Wife of Er, the firstborn son of Judah by a Canaanitess. Later, as a widow, Tamar bore two sons to Judah named Perez and Zerah (Gn 38:6-24; 1 Chr 2:4). Tamar preserved the line of Judah through Perez (Ru 4:12), and her name is recorded in the genealogy of Christ (Mt 1:3). See also Genealogy of Jesus Christ. 2. Sister of Absalom and the daughter of David by his wife Maacah, the Geshurite. Through deceit, Tamar was seduced by Amnon, her half brother. In vengeance, Absalom, her...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":46025,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:12","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:12<\/strong> Like Ruth, <em>Tamar<\/em> had been a foreigner; she became the mother of <em>Perez<\/em> and Zerah, through whom Judah’s descendants came.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:12<\/strong> Like Ruth, <em>Tamar<\/em> had been a foreigner; she became the mother of <em>Perez<\/em> and Zerah, through whom Judah’s descendants came.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:12 Like Ruth, Tamar had been a foreigner; she became the mother of Perez and Zerah, through whom Judah’s descendants came.","summary_en":"4:12 Like Ruth, Tamar had been a foreigner; she became the mother of Perez and Zerah, through whom Judah’s descendants came.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73651,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:12","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:12<\/strong> Like Ruth, <em>Tamar<\/em> had been a foreigner; she became the mother of <em>Perez<\/em> and Zerah, through whom Judah’s descendants came.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:12<\/strong> Like Ruth, <em>Tamar<\/em> had been a foreigner; she became the mother of <em>Perez<\/em> and Zerah, through whom Judah’s descendants came.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:12 Like Ruth, Tamar had been a foreigner; she became the mother of Perez and Zerah, through whom Judah’s descendants came.","summary_en":"4:12 Like Ruth, Tamar had been a foreigner; she became the mother of Perez and Zerah, through whom Judah’s descendants came.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101277,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:12","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:12<\/strong> Like Ruth, <em>Tamar<\/em> had been a foreigner; she became the mother of <em>Perez<\/em> and Zerah, through whom Judah’s descendants came.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:12<\/strong> Like Ruth, <em>Tamar<\/em> had been a foreigner; she became the mother of <em>Perez<\/em> and Zerah, through whom Judah’s descendants came.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:12 Like Ruth, Tamar had been a foreigner; she became the mother of Perez and Zerah, through whom Judah’s descendants came.","summary_en":"4:12 Like Ruth, Tamar had been a foreigner; she became the mother of Perez and Zerah, through whom Judah’s descendants came.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128903,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:12","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:12<\/strong> Like Ruth, <em>Tamar<\/em> had been a foreigner; she became the mother of <em>Perez<\/em> and Zerah, through whom Judah’s descendants came.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:12<\/strong> Like Ruth, <em>Tamar<\/em> had been a foreigner; she became the mother of <em>Perez<\/em> and Zerah, through whom Judah’s descendants came.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:12 Like Ruth, Tamar had been a foreigner; she became the mother of Perez and Zerah, through whom Judah’s descendants came.","summary_en":"4:12 Like Ruth, Tamar had been a foreigner; she became the mother of Perez and Zerah, through whom Judah’s descendants came.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"13":[{"id":41323,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"David","title_en":"David","content_ro":"<h3>David<\/h3>\n<p>David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance.<\/p>\n<p>David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use David to complete the conquest of the land.<\/p>\n<p>As a youth, David was a simple shepherd, watching his father’s sheep (1 Sam 16:11; 17:14-15). His life took an unexpected turn when the prophet Samuel came to Jesse and anointed David as the next king of Israel. However, David’s kingship was not initiated by a coup or an assassination. In fact, David became a faithful servant to King Saul. David first entered Saul’s service as a musician, playing songs that soothed Saul’s tormented soul (16:14-23). This service anticipated David’s role as the composer of many of the psalms. The youthful David also helped Saul by famously defeating the Philistine champion Goliath in individual combat (17:32-51). This victory anticipated David’s role as a victorious military leader.<\/p>\n<p>Although David was loyal, Saul grew deeply suspicious of him, and David had to flee. He was able to escape with help from Saul’s own children, Jonathan and Michal. David led a virtual kingdom in exile. He had a standing army of six hundred men. The prophet Gad and the priest Abiathar were also with him, providing direction and guidance from the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>God’s long-suffering patience finally ran out with Saul, and Saul died on the battlefield. Yet it was still not easy for David to establish his rule over all Israel. The tribe of Judah immediately proclaimed him its king, but at first the northern tribes chose Ishbosheth, a son of Saul, to be their leader. Ishbosheth was not a powerful or good leader; he only stayed in power because of the protection of his father’s military leader, Abner. However, Ishbosheth foolishly insulted Abner, so the general helped turn the kingdom over to David.<\/p>\n<p>As king over a united Israel, David proceeded to solidify the kingdom. He and his men captured Jerusalem from the Jebusites and made this central city his capital. He also expelled the remaining Philistines from the land. He then brought the Ark of the Covenant into Jerusalem. David wanted to build a permanent temple to God in Jerusalem to replace the Tabernacle. God denied this wish, but he showed his love for David by entering into a covenant with him that established his descendants as a dynasty (2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s life soon took a turn for the worse, however (see 2 Sam 11–12). At a time when he probably should have been on the battlefield with his army, he was lounging around on the palace roof. He saw a beautiful woman named Bathsheba taking a bath. He wanted her, so, like a Near Eastern despot, he took her. She became pregnant, and his attempt to cover up his adultery failed. In a desperate attempt to keep things secret, he had her husband, Uriah, killed. But not even a great king like David can keep secrets from God, and God sent his prophet Nathan to confront David. David repented (see Pss 32, 51), but the consequences of his actions plagued his family and the rest of his reign.<\/p>\n<p>From that point on, David’s family fell apart. David’s son Amnon raped his half sister Tamar (2 Sam 13:1-14). Her brother Absalom then murdered Amnon (2 Sam 13:20-29). Absalom later created a civil war as he tried to steal the throne from his father (2 Sam 15–18). Another son, Adonijah, tried to take the throne from David by having himself proclaimed king while his father was still alive (1 Kgs 1:5-10). But David was able to muster enough strength to ensure that Solomon would succeed him (1 Kgs 1:28-40). David died, Solomon was proclaimed king, and David’s long dynasty began (as promised in 2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s successors seldom measured up. Only rarely did his descendants lead the nation to worship God faithfully; the united monarchy did not even outlive Solomon. In the centuries that followed, the descendants of David ruled only Judah in the south. Eventually, the kingdom of Judah was destroyed. Never again did a descendant of David reign as king in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>What, then, of the promise to David that “your throne will be secure forever” (2 Sam 7:16)? The New Testament points to Jesus. He was the descendant of David, and God proclaimed him the Christ, or Messiah—the anointed king (see Matt 1:1; 9:27; 12:23; Mark 10:47-48; 11:10; 12:35-37; Luke 18:38-39; 20:41-44; John 7:42; Rev 5:5; 22:16). The life and rule of David foreshadows the messianic reign of Jesus Christ, which will last forever (see Luke 1:32-33; Rev 11:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ruth 4:13-22; 1 Sam 16:1–17:58; 18:1–27:12; 29:1–30:31; 2 Sam 1:1–24:25; 1 Kgs 1:1–2:12; 1 Chr 11:1–29:30; Pss 1–32, 34–41, 51–71, 86, 91–110, 122, 124, 131, 133, 138–145; Matt 1:1; 9:27; 22:41-46; Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44; John 7:40-44; Acts 2:22-37; 13:20-43; Rom 1:3; Rev 22:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>David<\/h3>\n<p>David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance.<\/p>\n<p>David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use David to complete the conquest of the land.<\/p>\n<p>As a youth, David was a simple shepherd, watching his father’s sheep (1 Sam 16:11; 17:14-15). His life took an unexpected turn when the prophet Samuel came to Jesse and anointed David as the next king of Israel. However, David’s kingship was not initiated by a coup or an assassination. In fact, David became a faithful servant to King Saul. David first entered Saul’s service as a musician, playing songs that soothed Saul’s tormented soul (16:14-23). This service anticipated David’s role as the composer of many of the psalms. The youthful David also helped Saul by famously defeating the Philistine champion Goliath in individual combat (17:32-51). This victory anticipated David’s role as a victorious military leader.<\/p>\n<p>Although David was loyal, Saul grew deeply suspicious of him, and David had to flee. He was able to escape with help from Saul’s own children, Jonathan and Michal. David led a virtual kingdom in exile. He had a standing army of six hundred men. The prophet Gad and the priest Abiathar were also with him, providing direction and guidance from the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>God’s long-suffering patience finally ran out with Saul, and Saul died on the battlefield. Yet it was still not easy for David to establish his rule over all Israel. The tribe of Judah immediately proclaimed him its king, but at first the northern tribes chose Ishbosheth, a son of Saul, to be their leader. Ishbosheth was not a powerful or good leader; he only stayed in power because of the protection of his father’s military leader, Abner. However, Ishbosheth foolishly insulted Abner, so the general helped turn the kingdom over to David.<\/p>\n<p>As king over a united Israel, David proceeded to solidify the kingdom. He and his men captured Jerusalem from the Jebusites and made this central city his capital. He also expelled the remaining Philistines from the land. He then brought the Ark of the Covenant into Jerusalem. David wanted to build a permanent temple to God in Jerusalem to replace the Tabernacle. God denied this wish, but he showed his love for David by entering into a covenant with him that established his descendants as a dynasty (2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s life soon took a turn for the worse, however (see 2 Sam 11–12). At a time when he probably should have been on the battlefield with his army, he was lounging around on the palace roof. He saw a beautiful woman named Bathsheba taking a bath. He wanted her, so, like a Near Eastern despot, he took her. She became pregnant, and his attempt to cover up his adultery failed. In a desperate attempt to keep things secret, he had her husband, Uriah, killed. But not even a great king like David can keep secrets from God, and God sent his prophet Nathan to confront David. David repented (see Pss 32, 51), but the consequences of his actions plagued his family and the rest of his reign.<\/p>\n<p>From that point on, David’s family fell apart. David’s son Amnon raped his half sister Tamar (2 Sam 13:1-14). Her brother Absalom then murdered Amnon (2 Sam 13:20-29). Absalom later created a civil war as he tried to steal the throne from his father (2 Sam 15–18). Another son, Adonijah, tried to take the throne from David by having himself proclaimed king while his father was still alive (1 Kgs 1:5-10). But David was able to muster enough strength to ensure that Solomon would succeed him (1 Kgs 1:28-40). David died, Solomon was proclaimed king, and David’s long dynasty began (as promised in 2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s successors seldom measured up. Only rarely did his descendants lead the nation to worship God faithfully; the united monarchy did not even outlive Solomon. In the centuries that followed, the descendants of David ruled only Judah in the south. Eventually, the kingdom of Judah was destroyed. Never again did a descendant of David reign as king in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>What, then, of the promise to David that “your throne will be secure forever” (2 Sam 7:16)? The New Testament points to Jesus. He was the descendant of David, and God proclaimed him the Christ, or Messiah—the anointed king (see Matt 1:1; 9:27; 12:23; Mark 10:47-48; 11:10; 12:35-37; Luke 18:38-39; 20:41-44; John 7:42; Rev 5:5; 22:16). The life and rule of David foreshadows the messianic reign of Jesus Christ, which will last forever (see Luke 1:32-33; Rev 11:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ruth 4:13-22; 1 Sam 16:1–17:58; 18:1–27:12; 29:1–30:31; 2 Sam 1:1–24:25; 1 Kgs 1:1–2:12; 1 Chr 11:1–29:30; Pss 1–32, 34–41, 51–71, 86, 91–110, 122, 124, 131, 133, 138–145; Matt 1:1; 9:27; 22:41-46; Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44; John 7:40-44; Acts 2:22-37; 13:20-43; Rom 1:3; Rev 22:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"David David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance. David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use Dav...","summary_en":"David David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance. David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use Dav...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":68949,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"David","title_en":"David","content_ro":"<h3>David<\/h3>\n<p>David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance.<\/p>\n<p>David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use David to complete the conquest of the land.<\/p>\n<p>As a youth, David was a simple shepherd, watching his father’s sheep (1 Sam 16:11; 17:14-15). His life took an unexpected turn when the prophet Samuel came to Jesse and anointed David as the next king of Israel. However, David’s kingship was not initiated by a coup or an assassination. In fact, David became a faithful servant to King Saul. David first entered Saul’s service as a musician, playing songs that soothed Saul’s tormented soul (16:14-23). This service anticipated David’s role as the composer of many of the psalms. The youthful David also helped Saul by famously defeating the Philistine champion Goliath in individual combat (17:32-51). This victory anticipated David’s role as a victorious military leader.<\/p>\n<p>Although David was loyal, Saul grew deeply suspicious of him, and David had to flee. He was able to escape with help from Saul’s own children, Jonathan and Michal. David led a virtual kingdom in exile. He had a standing army of six hundred men. The prophet Gad and the priest Abiathar were also with him, providing direction and guidance from the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>God’s long-suffering patience finally ran out with Saul, and Saul died on the battlefield. Yet it was still not easy for David to establish his rule over all Israel. The tribe of Judah immediately proclaimed him its king, but at first the northern tribes chose Ishbosheth, a son of Saul, to be their leader. Ishbosheth was not a powerful or good leader; he only stayed in power because of the protection of his father’s military leader, Abner. However, Ishbosheth foolishly insulted Abner, so the general helped turn the kingdom over to David.<\/p>\n<p>As king over a united Israel, David proceeded to solidify the kingdom. He and his men captured Jerusalem from the Jebusites and made this central city his capital. He also expelled the remaining Philistines from the land. He then brought the Ark of the Covenant into Jerusalem. David wanted to build a permanent temple to God in Jerusalem to replace the Tabernacle. God denied this wish, but he showed his love for David by entering into a covenant with him that established his descendants as a dynasty (2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s life soon took a turn for the worse, however (see 2 Sam 11–12). At a time when he probably should have been on the battlefield with his army, he was lounging around on the palace roof. He saw a beautiful woman named Bathsheba taking a bath. He wanted her, so, like a Near Eastern despot, he took her. She became pregnant, and his attempt to cover up his adultery failed. In a desperate attempt to keep things secret, he had her husband, Uriah, killed. But not even a great king like David can keep secrets from God, and God sent his prophet Nathan to confront David. David repented (see Pss 32, 51), but the consequences of his actions plagued his family and the rest of his reign.<\/p>\n<p>From that point on, David’s family fell apart. David’s son Amnon raped his half sister Tamar (2 Sam 13:1-14). Her brother Absalom then murdered Amnon (2 Sam 13:20-29). Absalom later created a civil war as he tried to steal the throne from his father (2 Sam 15–18). Another son, Adonijah, tried to take the throne from David by having himself proclaimed king while his father was still alive (1 Kgs 1:5-10). But David was able to muster enough strength to ensure that Solomon would succeed him (1 Kgs 1:28-40). David died, Solomon was proclaimed king, and David’s long dynasty began (as promised in 2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s successors seldom measured up. Only rarely did his descendants lead the nation to worship God faithfully; the united monarchy did not even outlive Solomon. In the centuries that followed, the descendants of David ruled only Judah in the south. Eventually, the kingdom of Judah was destroyed. Never again did a descendant of David reign as king in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>What, then, of the promise to David that “your throne will be secure forever” (2 Sam 7:16)? The New Testament points to Jesus. He was the descendant of David, and God proclaimed him the Christ, or Messiah—the anointed king (see Matt 1:1; 9:27; 12:23; Mark 10:47-48; 11:10; 12:35-37; Luke 18:38-39; 20:41-44; John 7:42; Rev 5:5; 22:16). The life and rule of David foreshadows the messianic reign of Jesus Christ, which will last forever (see Luke 1:32-33; Rev 11:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ruth 4:13-22; 1 Sam 16:1–17:58; 18:1–27:12; 29:1–30:31; 2 Sam 1:1–24:25; 1 Kgs 1:1–2:12; 1 Chr 11:1–29:30; Pss 1–32, 34–41, 51–71, 86, 91–110, 122, 124, 131, 133, 138–145; Matt 1:1; 9:27; 22:41-46; Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44; John 7:40-44; Acts 2:22-37; 13:20-43; Rom 1:3; Rev 22:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>David<\/h3>\n<p>David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance.<\/p>\n<p>David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use David to complete the conquest of the land.<\/p>\n<p>As a youth, David was a simple shepherd, watching his father’s sheep (1 Sam 16:11; 17:14-15). His life took an unexpected turn when the prophet Samuel came to Jesse and anointed David as the next king of Israel. However, David’s kingship was not initiated by a coup or an assassination. In fact, David became a faithful servant to King Saul. David first entered Saul’s service as a musician, playing songs that soothed Saul’s tormented soul (16:14-23). This service anticipated David’s role as the composer of many of the psalms. The youthful David also helped Saul by famously defeating the Philistine champion Goliath in individual combat (17:32-51). This victory anticipated David’s role as a victorious military leader.<\/p>\n<p>Although David was loyal, Saul grew deeply suspicious of him, and David had to flee. He was able to escape with help from Saul’s own children, Jonathan and Michal. David led a virtual kingdom in exile. He had a standing army of six hundred men. The prophet Gad and the priest Abiathar were also with him, providing direction and guidance from the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>God’s long-suffering patience finally ran out with Saul, and Saul died on the battlefield. Yet it was still not easy for David to establish his rule over all Israel. The tribe of Judah immediately proclaimed him its king, but at first the northern tribes chose Ishbosheth, a son of Saul, to be their leader. Ishbosheth was not a powerful or good leader; he only stayed in power because of the protection of his father’s military leader, Abner. However, Ishbosheth foolishly insulted Abner, so the general helped turn the kingdom over to David.<\/p>\n<p>As king over a united Israel, David proceeded to solidify the kingdom. He and his men captured Jerusalem from the Jebusites and made this central city his capital. He also expelled the remaining Philistines from the land. He then brought the Ark of the Covenant into Jerusalem. David wanted to build a permanent temple to God in Jerusalem to replace the Tabernacle. God denied this wish, but he showed his love for David by entering into a covenant with him that established his descendants as a dynasty (2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s life soon took a turn for the worse, however (see 2 Sam 11–12). At a time when he probably should have been on the battlefield with his army, he was lounging around on the palace roof. He saw a beautiful woman named Bathsheba taking a bath. He wanted her, so, like a Near Eastern despot, he took her. She became pregnant, and his attempt to cover up his adultery failed. In a desperate attempt to keep things secret, he had her husband, Uriah, killed. But not even a great king like David can keep secrets from God, and God sent his prophet Nathan to confront David. David repented (see Pss 32, 51), but the consequences of his actions plagued his family and the rest of his reign.<\/p>\n<p>From that point on, David’s family fell apart. David’s son Amnon raped his half sister Tamar (2 Sam 13:1-14). Her brother Absalom then murdered Amnon (2 Sam 13:20-29). Absalom later created a civil war as he tried to steal the throne from his father (2 Sam 15–18). Another son, Adonijah, tried to take the throne from David by having himself proclaimed king while his father was still alive (1 Kgs 1:5-10). But David was able to muster enough strength to ensure that Solomon would succeed him (1 Kgs 1:28-40). David died, Solomon was proclaimed king, and David’s long dynasty began (as promised in 2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s successors seldom measured up. Only rarely did his descendants lead the nation to worship God faithfully; the united monarchy did not even outlive Solomon. In the centuries that followed, the descendants of David ruled only Judah in the south. Eventually, the kingdom of Judah was destroyed. Never again did a descendant of David reign as king in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>What, then, of the promise to David that “your throne will be secure forever” (2 Sam 7:16)? The New Testament points to Jesus. He was the descendant of David, and God proclaimed him the Christ, or Messiah—the anointed king (see Matt 1:1; 9:27; 12:23; Mark 10:47-48; 11:10; 12:35-37; Luke 18:38-39; 20:41-44; John 7:42; Rev 5:5; 22:16). The life and rule of David foreshadows the messianic reign of Jesus Christ, which will last forever (see Luke 1:32-33; Rev 11:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ruth 4:13-22; 1 Sam 16:1–17:58; 18:1–27:12; 29:1–30:31; 2 Sam 1:1–24:25; 1 Kgs 1:1–2:12; 1 Chr 11:1–29:30; Pss 1–32, 34–41, 51–71, 86, 91–110, 122, 124, 131, 133, 138–145; Matt 1:1; 9:27; 22:41-46; Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44; John 7:40-44; Acts 2:22-37; 13:20-43; Rom 1:3; Rev 22:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"David David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance. David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use Dav...","summary_en":"David David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance. David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use Dav...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":96575,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"David","title_en":"David","content_ro":"<h3>David<\/h3>\n<p>David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance.<\/p>\n<p>David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use David to complete the conquest of the land.<\/p>\n<p>As a youth, David was a simple shepherd, watching his father’s sheep (1 Sam 16:11; 17:14-15). His life took an unexpected turn when the prophet Samuel came to Jesse and anointed David as the next king of Israel. However, David’s kingship was not initiated by a coup or an assassination. In fact, David became a faithful servant to King Saul. David first entered Saul’s service as a musician, playing songs that soothed Saul’s tormented soul (16:14-23). This service anticipated David’s role as the composer of many of the psalms. The youthful David also helped Saul by famously defeating the Philistine champion Goliath in individual combat (17:32-51). This victory anticipated David’s role as a victorious military leader.<\/p>\n<p>Although David was loyal, Saul grew deeply suspicious of him, and David had to flee. He was able to escape with help from Saul’s own children, Jonathan and Michal. David led a virtual kingdom in exile. He had a standing army of six hundred men. The prophet Gad and the priest Abiathar were also with him, providing direction and guidance from the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>God’s long-suffering patience finally ran out with Saul, and Saul died on the battlefield. Yet it was still not easy for David to establish his rule over all Israel. The tribe of Judah immediately proclaimed him its king, but at first the northern tribes chose Ishbosheth, a son of Saul, to be their leader. Ishbosheth was not a powerful or good leader; he only stayed in power because of the protection of his father’s military leader, Abner. However, Ishbosheth foolishly insulted Abner, so the general helped turn the kingdom over to David.<\/p>\n<p>As king over a united Israel, David proceeded to solidify the kingdom. He and his men captured Jerusalem from the Jebusites and made this central city his capital. He also expelled the remaining Philistines from the land. He then brought the Ark of the Covenant into Jerusalem. David wanted to build a permanent temple to God in Jerusalem to replace the Tabernacle. God denied this wish, but he showed his love for David by entering into a covenant with him that established his descendants as a dynasty (2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s life soon took a turn for the worse, however (see 2 Sam 11–12). At a time when he probably should have been on the battlefield with his army, he was lounging around on the palace roof. He saw a beautiful woman named Bathsheba taking a bath. He wanted her, so, like a Near Eastern despot, he took her. She became pregnant, and his attempt to cover up his adultery failed. In a desperate attempt to keep things secret, he had her husband, Uriah, killed. But not even a great king like David can keep secrets from God, and God sent his prophet Nathan to confront David. David repented (see Pss 32, 51), but the consequences of his actions plagued his family and the rest of his reign.<\/p>\n<p>From that point on, David’s family fell apart. David’s son Amnon raped his half sister Tamar (2 Sam 13:1-14). Her brother Absalom then murdered Amnon (2 Sam 13:20-29). Absalom later created a civil war as he tried to steal the throne from his father (2 Sam 15–18). Another son, Adonijah, tried to take the throne from David by having himself proclaimed king while his father was still alive (1 Kgs 1:5-10). But David was able to muster enough strength to ensure that Solomon would succeed him (1 Kgs 1:28-40). David died, Solomon was proclaimed king, and David’s long dynasty began (as promised in 2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s successors seldom measured up. Only rarely did his descendants lead the nation to worship God faithfully; the united monarchy did not even outlive Solomon. In the centuries that followed, the descendants of David ruled only Judah in the south. Eventually, the kingdom of Judah was destroyed. Never again did a descendant of David reign as king in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>What, then, of the promise to David that “your throne will be secure forever” (2 Sam 7:16)? The New Testament points to Jesus. He was the descendant of David, and God proclaimed him the Christ, or Messiah—the anointed king (see Matt 1:1; 9:27; 12:23; Mark 10:47-48; 11:10; 12:35-37; Luke 18:38-39; 20:41-44; John 7:42; Rev 5:5; 22:16). The life and rule of David foreshadows the messianic reign of Jesus Christ, which will last forever (see Luke 1:32-33; Rev 11:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ruth 4:13-22; 1 Sam 16:1–17:58; 18:1–27:12; 29:1–30:31; 2 Sam 1:1–24:25; 1 Kgs 1:1–2:12; 1 Chr 11:1–29:30; Pss 1–32, 34–41, 51–71, 86, 91–110, 122, 124, 131, 133, 138–145; Matt 1:1; 9:27; 22:41-46; Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44; John 7:40-44; Acts 2:22-37; 13:20-43; Rom 1:3; Rev 22:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>David<\/h3>\n<p>David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance.<\/p>\n<p>David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use David to complete the conquest of the land.<\/p>\n<p>As a youth, David was a simple shepherd, watching his father’s sheep (1 Sam 16:11; 17:14-15). His life took an unexpected turn when the prophet Samuel came to Jesse and anointed David as the next king of Israel. However, David’s kingship was not initiated by a coup or an assassination. In fact, David became a faithful servant to King Saul. David first entered Saul’s service as a musician, playing songs that soothed Saul’s tormented soul (16:14-23). This service anticipated David’s role as the composer of many of the psalms. The youthful David also helped Saul by famously defeating the Philistine champion Goliath in individual combat (17:32-51). This victory anticipated David’s role as a victorious military leader.<\/p>\n<p>Although David was loyal, Saul grew deeply suspicious of him, and David had to flee. He was able to escape with help from Saul’s own children, Jonathan and Michal. David led a virtual kingdom in exile. He had a standing army of six hundred men. The prophet Gad and the priest Abiathar were also with him, providing direction and guidance from the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>God’s long-suffering patience finally ran out with Saul, and Saul died on the battlefield. Yet it was still not easy for David to establish his rule over all Israel. The tribe of Judah immediately proclaimed him its king, but at first the northern tribes chose Ishbosheth, a son of Saul, to be their leader. Ishbosheth was not a powerful or good leader; he only stayed in power because of the protection of his father’s military leader, Abner. However, Ishbosheth foolishly insulted Abner, so the general helped turn the kingdom over to David.<\/p>\n<p>As king over a united Israel, David proceeded to solidify the kingdom. He and his men captured Jerusalem from the Jebusites and made this central city his capital. He also expelled the remaining Philistines from the land. He then brought the Ark of the Covenant into Jerusalem. David wanted to build a permanent temple to God in Jerusalem to replace the Tabernacle. God denied this wish, but he showed his love for David by entering into a covenant with him that established his descendants as a dynasty (2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s life soon took a turn for the worse, however (see 2 Sam 11–12). At a time when he probably should have been on the battlefield with his army, he was lounging around on the palace roof. He saw a beautiful woman named Bathsheba taking a bath. He wanted her, so, like a Near Eastern despot, he took her. She became pregnant, and his attempt to cover up his adultery failed. In a desperate attempt to keep things secret, he had her husband, Uriah, killed. But not even a great king like David can keep secrets from God, and God sent his prophet Nathan to confront David. David repented (see Pss 32, 51), but the consequences of his actions plagued his family and the rest of his reign.<\/p>\n<p>From that point on, David’s family fell apart. David’s son Amnon raped his half sister Tamar (2 Sam 13:1-14). Her brother Absalom then murdered Amnon (2 Sam 13:20-29). Absalom later created a civil war as he tried to steal the throne from his father (2 Sam 15–18). Another son, Adonijah, tried to take the throne from David by having himself proclaimed king while his father was still alive (1 Kgs 1:5-10). But David was able to muster enough strength to ensure that Solomon would succeed him (1 Kgs 1:28-40). David died, Solomon was proclaimed king, and David’s long dynasty began (as promised in 2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s successors seldom measured up. Only rarely did his descendants lead the nation to worship God faithfully; the united monarchy did not even outlive Solomon. In the centuries that followed, the descendants of David ruled only Judah in the south. Eventually, the kingdom of Judah was destroyed. Never again did a descendant of David reign as king in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>What, then, of the promise to David that “your throne will be secure forever” (2 Sam 7:16)? The New Testament points to Jesus. He was the descendant of David, and God proclaimed him the Christ, or Messiah—the anointed king (see Matt 1:1; 9:27; 12:23; Mark 10:47-48; 11:10; 12:35-37; Luke 18:38-39; 20:41-44; John 7:42; Rev 5:5; 22:16). The life and rule of David foreshadows the messianic reign of Jesus Christ, which will last forever (see Luke 1:32-33; Rev 11:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ruth 4:13-22; 1 Sam 16:1–17:58; 18:1–27:12; 29:1–30:31; 2 Sam 1:1–24:25; 1 Kgs 1:1–2:12; 1 Chr 11:1–29:30; Pss 1–32, 34–41, 51–71, 86, 91–110, 122, 124, 131, 133, 138–145; Matt 1:1; 9:27; 22:41-46; Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44; John 7:40-44; Acts 2:22-37; 13:20-43; Rom 1:3; Rev 22:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"David David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance. David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use Dav...","summary_en":"David David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance. David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use Dav...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124201,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"David","title_en":"David","content_ro":"<h3>David<\/h3>\n<p>David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance.<\/p>\n<p>David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use David to complete the conquest of the land.<\/p>\n<p>As a youth, David was a simple shepherd, watching his father’s sheep (1 Sam 16:11; 17:14-15). His life took an unexpected turn when the prophet Samuel came to Jesse and anointed David as the next king of Israel. However, David’s kingship was not initiated by a coup or an assassination. In fact, David became a faithful servant to King Saul. David first entered Saul’s service as a musician, playing songs that soothed Saul’s tormented soul (16:14-23). This service anticipated David’s role as the composer of many of the psalms. The youthful David also helped Saul by famously defeating the Philistine champion Goliath in individual combat (17:32-51). This victory anticipated David’s role as a victorious military leader.<\/p>\n<p>Although David was loyal, Saul grew deeply suspicious of him, and David had to flee. He was able to escape with help from Saul’s own children, Jonathan and Michal. David led a virtual kingdom in exile. He had a standing army of six hundred men. The prophet Gad and the priest Abiathar were also with him, providing direction and guidance from the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>God’s long-suffering patience finally ran out with Saul, and Saul died on the battlefield. Yet it was still not easy for David to establish his rule over all Israel. The tribe of Judah immediately proclaimed him its king, but at first the northern tribes chose Ishbosheth, a son of Saul, to be their leader. Ishbosheth was not a powerful or good leader; he only stayed in power because of the protection of his father’s military leader, Abner. However, Ishbosheth foolishly insulted Abner, so the general helped turn the kingdom over to David.<\/p>\n<p>As king over a united Israel, David proceeded to solidify the kingdom. He and his men captured Jerusalem from the Jebusites and made this central city his capital. He also expelled the remaining Philistines from the land. He then brought the Ark of the Covenant into Jerusalem. David wanted to build a permanent temple to God in Jerusalem to replace the Tabernacle. God denied this wish, but he showed his love for David by entering into a covenant with him that established his descendants as a dynasty (2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s life soon took a turn for the worse, however (see 2 Sam 11–12). At a time when he probably should have been on the battlefield with his army, he was lounging around on the palace roof. He saw a beautiful woman named Bathsheba taking a bath. He wanted her, so, like a Near Eastern despot, he took her. She became pregnant, and his attempt to cover up his adultery failed. In a desperate attempt to keep things secret, he had her husband, Uriah, killed. But not even a great king like David can keep secrets from God, and God sent his prophet Nathan to confront David. David repented (see Pss 32, 51), but the consequences of his actions plagued his family and the rest of his reign.<\/p>\n<p>From that point on, David’s family fell apart. David’s son Amnon raped his half sister Tamar (2 Sam 13:1-14). Her brother Absalom then murdered Amnon (2 Sam 13:20-29). Absalom later created a civil war as he tried to steal the throne from his father (2 Sam 15–18). Another son, Adonijah, tried to take the throne from David by having himself proclaimed king while his father was still alive (1 Kgs 1:5-10). But David was able to muster enough strength to ensure that Solomon would succeed him (1 Kgs 1:28-40). David died, Solomon was proclaimed king, and David’s long dynasty began (as promised in 2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s successors seldom measured up. Only rarely did his descendants lead the nation to worship God faithfully; the united monarchy did not even outlive Solomon. In the centuries that followed, the descendants of David ruled only Judah in the south. Eventually, the kingdom of Judah was destroyed. Never again did a descendant of David reign as king in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>What, then, of the promise to David that “your throne will be secure forever” (2 Sam 7:16)? The New Testament points to Jesus. He was the descendant of David, and God proclaimed him the Christ, or Messiah—the anointed king (see Matt 1:1; 9:27; 12:23; Mark 10:47-48; 11:10; 12:35-37; Luke 18:38-39; 20:41-44; John 7:42; Rev 5:5; 22:16). The life and rule of David foreshadows the messianic reign of Jesus Christ, which will last forever (see Luke 1:32-33; Rev 11:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ruth 4:13-22; 1 Sam 16:1–17:58; 18:1–27:12; 29:1–30:31; 2 Sam 1:1–24:25; 1 Kgs 1:1–2:12; 1 Chr 11:1–29:30; Pss 1–32, 34–41, 51–71, 86, 91–110, 122, 124, 131, 133, 138–145; Matt 1:1; 9:27; 22:41-46; Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44; John 7:40-44; Acts 2:22-37; 13:20-43; Rom 1:3; Rev 22:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>David<\/h3>\n<p>David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance.<\/p>\n<p>David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use David to complete the conquest of the land.<\/p>\n<p>As a youth, David was a simple shepherd, watching his father’s sheep (1 Sam 16:11; 17:14-15). His life took an unexpected turn when the prophet Samuel came to Jesse and anointed David as the next king of Israel. However, David’s kingship was not initiated by a coup or an assassination. In fact, David became a faithful servant to King Saul. David first entered Saul’s service as a musician, playing songs that soothed Saul’s tormented soul (16:14-23). This service anticipated David’s role as the composer of many of the psalms. The youthful David also helped Saul by famously defeating the Philistine champion Goliath in individual combat (17:32-51). This victory anticipated David’s role as a victorious military leader.<\/p>\n<p>Although David was loyal, Saul grew deeply suspicious of him, and David had to flee. He was able to escape with help from Saul’s own children, Jonathan and Michal. David led a virtual kingdom in exile. He had a standing army of six hundred men. The prophet Gad and the priest Abiathar were also with him, providing direction and guidance from the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>God’s long-suffering patience finally ran out with Saul, and Saul died on the battlefield. Yet it was still not easy for David to establish his rule over all Israel. The tribe of Judah immediately proclaimed him its king, but at first the northern tribes chose Ishbosheth, a son of Saul, to be their leader. Ishbosheth was not a powerful or good leader; he only stayed in power because of the protection of his father’s military leader, Abner. However, Ishbosheth foolishly insulted Abner, so the general helped turn the kingdom over to David.<\/p>\n<p>As king over a united Israel, David proceeded to solidify the kingdom. He and his men captured Jerusalem from the Jebusites and made this central city his capital. He also expelled the remaining Philistines from the land. He then brought the Ark of the Covenant into Jerusalem. David wanted to build a permanent temple to God in Jerusalem to replace the Tabernacle. God denied this wish, but he showed his love for David by entering into a covenant with him that established his descendants as a dynasty (2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s life soon took a turn for the worse, however (see 2 Sam 11–12). At a time when he probably should have been on the battlefield with his army, he was lounging around on the palace roof. He saw a beautiful woman named Bathsheba taking a bath. He wanted her, so, like a Near Eastern despot, he took her. She became pregnant, and his attempt to cover up his adultery failed. In a desperate attempt to keep things secret, he had her husband, Uriah, killed. But not even a great king like David can keep secrets from God, and God sent his prophet Nathan to confront David. David repented (see Pss 32, 51), but the consequences of his actions plagued his family and the rest of his reign.<\/p>\n<p>From that point on, David’s family fell apart. David’s son Amnon raped his half sister Tamar (2 Sam 13:1-14). Her brother Absalom then murdered Amnon (2 Sam 13:20-29). Absalom later created a civil war as he tried to steal the throne from his father (2 Sam 15–18). Another son, Adonijah, tried to take the throne from David by having himself proclaimed king while his father was still alive (1 Kgs 1:5-10). But David was able to muster enough strength to ensure that Solomon would succeed him (1 Kgs 1:28-40). David died, Solomon was proclaimed king, and David’s long dynasty began (as promised in 2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s successors seldom measured up. Only rarely did his descendants lead the nation to worship God faithfully; the united monarchy did not even outlive Solomon. In the centuries that followed, the descendants of David ruled only Judah in the south. Eventually, the kingdom of Judah was destroyed. Never again did a descendant of David reign as king in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>What, then, of the promise to David that “your throne will be secure forever” (2 Sam 7:16)? The New Testament points to Jesus. He was the descendant of David, and God proclaimed him the Christ, or Messiah—the anointed king (see Matt 1:1; 9:27; 12:23; Mark 10:47-48; 11:10; 12:35-37; Luke 18:38-39; 20:41-44; John 7:42; Rev 5:5; 22:16). The life and rule of David foreshadows the messianic reign of Jesus Christ, which will last forever (see Luke 1:32-33; Rev 11:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ruth 4:13-22; 1 Sam 16:1–17:58; 18:1–27:12; 29:1–30:31; 2 Sam 1:1–24:25; 1 Kgs 1:1–2:12; 1 Chr 11:1–29:30; Pss 1–32, 34–41, 51–71, 86, 91–110, 122, 124, 131, 133, 138–145; Matt 1:1; 9:27; 22:41-46; Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44; John 7:40-44; Acts 2:22-37; 13:20-43; Rom 1:3; Rev 22:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"David David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance. David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use Dav...","summary_en":"David David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance. David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use Dav...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":46026,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:13","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:13<\/strong> <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> enabled:<\/em> See study note on 1:6.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:13<\/strong> <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> enabled:<\/em> See study note on 1:6.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:13 the Lord enabled: See study note on 1:6.","summary_en":"4:13 the Lord enabled: See study note on 1:6.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73652,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:13","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:13<\/strong> <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> enabled:<\/em> See study note on 1:6.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:13<\/strong> <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> enabled:<\/em> See study note on 1:6.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:13 the Lord enabled: See study note on 1:6.","summary_en":"4:13 the Lord enabled: See study note on 1:6.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101278,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:13","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:13<\/strong> <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> enabled:<\/em> See study note on 1:6.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:13<\/strong> <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> enabled:<\/em> See study note on 1:6.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:13 the Lord enabled: See study note on 1:6.","summary_en":"4:13 the Lord enabled: See study note on 1:6.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128904,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:13","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:13<\/strong> <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> enabled:<\/em> See study note on 1:6.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:13<\/strong> <em>the<\/em> <span>Lord<\/span><em> enabled:<\/em> See study note on 1:6.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:13 the Lord enabled: See study note on 1:6.","summary_en":"4:13 the Lord enabled: See study note on 1:6.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"14":[{"id":46027,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:14","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:14<\/strong> This child replaced the family <em>Naomi<\/em> had lost when her own two sons died in Moab. <em>The women of the town<\/em> recognized that <em>this child<\/em> completed the circle of redemption for Naomi.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:14<\/strong> This child replaced the family <em>Naomi<\/em> had lost when her own two sons died in Moab. <em>The women of the town<\/em> recognized that <em>this child<\/em> completed the circle of redemption for Naomi.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:14 This child replaced the family Naomi had lost when her own two sons died in Moab. The women of the town recognized that this child completed the circle of redemption for Naomi.","summary_en":"4:14 This child replaced the family Naomi had lost when her own two sons died in Moab. The women of the town recognized that this child completed the circle of redemption for Naomi.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73653,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:14","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:14<\/strong> This child replaced the family <em>Naomi<\/em> had lost when her own two sons died in Moab. <em>The women of the town<\/em> recognized that <em>this child<\/em> completed the circle of redemption for Naomi.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:14<\/strong> This child replaced the family <em>Naomi<\/em> had lost when her own two sons died in Moab. <em>The women of the town<\/em> recognized that <em>this child<\/em> completed the circle of redemption for Naomi.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:14 This child replaced the family Naomi had lost when her own two sons died in Moab. The women of the town recognized that this child completed the circle of redemption for Naomi.","summary_en":"4:14 This child replaced the family Naomi had lost when her own two sons died in Moab. The women of the town recognized that this child completed the circle of redemption for Naomi.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101279,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:14","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:14<\/strong> This child replaced the family <em>Naomi<\/em> had lost when her own two sons died in Moab. <em>The women of the town<\/em> recognized that <em>this child<\/em> completed the circle of redemption for Naomi.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:14<\/strong> This child replaced the family <em>Naomi<\/em> had lost when her own two sons died in Moab. <em>The women of the town<\/em> recognized that <em>this child<\/em> completed the circle of redemption for Naomi.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:14 This child replaced the family Naomi had lost when her own two sons died in Moab. The women of the town recognized that this child completed the circle of redemption for Naomi.","summary_en":"4:14 This child replaced the family Naomi had lost when her own two sons died in Moab. The women of the town recognized that this child completed the circle of redemption for Naomi.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128905,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:14","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:14<\/strong> This child replaced the family <em>Naomi<\/em> had lost when her own two sons died in Moab. <em>The women of the town<\/em> recognized that <em>this child<\/em> completed the circle of redemption for Naomi.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:14<\/strong> This child replaced the family <em>Naomi<\/em> had lost when her own two sons died in Moab. <em>The women of the town<\/em> recognized that <em>this child<\/em> completed the circle of redemption for Naomi.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:14 This child replaced the family Naomi had lost when her own two sons died in Moab. The women of the town recognized that this child completed the circle of redemption for Naomi.","summary_en":"4:14 This child replaced the family Naomi had lost when her own two sons died in Moab. The women of the town recognized that this child completed the circle of redemption for Naomi.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":33393,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Ruth","title_en":"Book of Ruth","content_ro":"<h3>RUTH, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p>• Message<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>The author of the book is unknown. The question of authorship has particular connection with the date of writing, and a few clues provide at least an educated guess. The book must have been written sometime after the beginning of David’s reign. The information in Ruth 4:18-22, which pertains to the historical significance of Ruth as David’s great-grandmother, bears this out. Since foreign marriages were not approved in the book of Ruth, it scarcely could have been written during the period in which Solomon began his policy of foreign marriages. Also, David’s close friendship with Moab might have prompted someone in his kingdom to write the book, thus presenting objective rationale for David’s actions (see 1 Sm 22:3-5). Consequently, the author may have been someone close to David, possibly Samuel, Nathan, or Abiathar.<\/p>\n<p>The time of the narrative is indicated by the opening statement: “In the days when the judges ruled. . . .” The dates of the judges probably comprise a period of about 300 years, beginning with the judgeship of Othniel and concluding with that of Samson, though Samuel also served as a judge. If the genealogical information is complete in Ruth 4:18-22, the events took place during the life of David’s great-grandfather and mark the birth of his grandfather. Allowing a 35-year generation span, the events would have taken place somewhere about the turn of the 11th century <span>BC<\/span>, or about 100 years before David’s birth.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The book’s purpose is closely related to its date of composition. Assuming an early date, that is, one close to David’s lifetime, its principal thrust must be the authentication of the Davidic line. The book may be considered as a justification for including the godly Moabitess in the nation of Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Introduction (1:1-5)<\/h5>\n<p>Driven by famine, Elimelech, with his wife, Naomi, and his two sons, Mahlon and Chilion, cross the Jordan to stay for a period of time in Moab, where there is sufficient provision. The two sons, after marrying Moabite women, die, and their father dies as well. Naomi is left a widow, with two foreign daughters-in-law.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Return to Bethlehem (1:6-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Hearing reports from Bethlehem that the famine has ended, Naomi makes preparations to return. Both of her daughters-in-law, Orpah and Ruth, accompany her for at least a portion of the journey. Probably thinking of the problems they might encounter as foreigners in Judah, Naomi strongly urges the girls to stay in their own land. Both of the young widows refuse, but Naomi presents the facts. First, she is not pregnant, so the chance of a younger brother fulfilling the levirate responsibility is not imminent. Second, she has no prospects of remarriage and consequently no prospect of further children. Then she also notes that even if the first two conditions were met immediately, the possibility of their waiting was impossible. Orpah is persuaded and kisses her mother-in-law good-bye.<\/p>\n<p>But Ruth “clung to her” (1:18). The verb, having the connotation of being glued to something, is the same verb used of marriage (Gn 2:24). Ruth demonstrated her serious intentions by making five commitments (Ru 1:16-17). In essence, Ruth renounced her former life in order to gain a life that she considered of greater value. She decided to follow the God of Israel and his laws. Ruth’s appeal to the God of Israel was more than equal to Naomi’s pleas, and the two of them returned together.<\/p>\n<p>Their arrival in Bethlehem was traumatic for Naomi. Having left Bethlehem with a husband and two sons, she returned empty. She told her friends to call her “Mara” (bitter). But she had returned at a propitious time, the beginning of the harvest season.<\/p>\n<h5>Reaping in the Fields of Boaz (2:1-23)<\/h5>\n<p>The first verse of the chapter provides the setting for the narrative that follows by introducing Boaz, a wealthy relative of Elimelech.<\/p>\n<p>In the second verse, Ruth volunteered to glean the fields by following the reapers and picking up the small amounts left behind. Gleaners were also permitted to harvest the grain in the corners of the fields—a provision for the poor contained in the law (Lv 19:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Ruth happened to come to the field of Boaz. When he visited this field, he noticed Ruth, inquired about her, and learned her identity. His overseer reported that she had industriously worked the fields from early morning until that time. Boaz, attracted to her because of her loyalty and concern for Naomi, graciously made additional provisions for her. She was given a favored position in reaping, directly behind the main body of reapers. Further, she was to receive water that had been drawn for her by the young men—an unorthodox arrangement.<\/p>\n<p>Ruth, falling before Boaz in a gesture of great humility and respect, asked why she—as a foreigner—should receive such favor. Boaz gave two reasons: her kindness to her mother-in-law, and her spiritual insight, which led her to seek after Israel’s God, “under whose wings you have come to take refuge” (Ru 2:12, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>She was also given a place at the reapers’ table and, upon Boaz’s orders, returned to the fields, this time to reap from the unharvested grain. At the end of the day she returned home to Naomi and told her of the day’s events. Naomi informed Ruth that Boaz had the right of redemption (see discussion below). Ruth returned to his fields until the end of the harvest season.<\/p>\n<h5>Relying upon the Kinsman (3:1-18)<\/h5>\n<p>Naomi advised Ruth to approach Boaz as a <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span><em>,<\/em> or kinsman-redeemer. The plan suggested by Naomi seems peculiar, yet some thoughts may give a certain coloring to it. (1) Naomi seems to have believed that Boaz was the nearest kinsman, being ignorant of the yet nearer one (3:12). Consequently, according to Israelite law (Dt 25:5ff.), it would be the duty of Boaz to marry Ruth to produce offspring, since her husband died. (2) The general presentation of Naomi’s character in this book is that of a God-fearing woman. It is certain that, however curious in its external form, there can be nothing counseled here that is repugnant to God’s law or shocking to a virtuous man such as Boaz. Otherwise, Naomi would have been frustrating her own purpose.<\/p>\n<p>Boaz’s response to Ruth’s actions demonstrated his gentlemanly concerns for her. He explained to her that he was not the nearest kinsman but promised that he would take care of the necessary procedures the next day. Protecting her reputation, Boaz sent her home before daylight. Naomi predicted that Boaz would settle the matter that very day.<\/p>\n<h5>Redeeming the Inheritance (4:1-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Boaz went to the place of business, the city gate. The city gate area comprised the forum where the public affairs of the city were discussed. Boaz indicated that he wished to discuss a matter of business with the nearer kinsman. Ten of the city elders acted as witnesses. The first matter at hand was to deal with the issue of property. Boaz asked this nearer kinsman if he was willing to acquire property for Naomi. This is stated in the traditional stipulation: “Your purchase of the land from Naomi also requires that you marry Ruth, the Moabite widow” (4:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). The nearer kinsman was unwilling to marry Ruth because this would inevitably cost him some financial loss, since he would have to divide his own property with any son of his born to Ruth. Thus he relinquished his rights by the custom of taking off his shoe. (The shoe was symbolic of the land rights that belonged to the inheritance.) So Boaz took the part of being the kinsman-redeemer. The marriage of Boaz and Ruth produced a son who, under Israel’s laws, was reckoned as Naomi’s child and heir.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Message\">Message<\/p>\n<p>First, the book of Ruth traces the lineage of Ruth to David. The completion of that line is in Matthew 1 and finds its fulfillment in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A second teaching is the beauty of God’s grace. A foreigner, even a Moabitess, can be linked with Israel’s blessing.<\/p>\n<p>Theologically, the concept of kinsman-redeemer as a type of Messiah is clearly evident. He must be a blood relative, have the ability to purchase, be willing to buy the inheritance, and be willing to marry the widow of the deceased kinsman.<\/p>\n<p>And finally, the love that Ruth showed to Naomi provides a pattern of devotion. The women of Bethlehem told Naomi, “Your daughter-in-law . . . loves you so much and [is] better to you than seven sons!” (4:15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RUTH, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p>• Message<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>The author of the book is unknown. The question of authorship has particular connection with the date of writing, and a few clues provide at least an educated guess. The book must have been written sometime after the beginning of David’s reign. The information in Ruth 4:18-22, which pertains to the historical significance of Ruth as David’s great-grandmother, bears this out. Since foreign marriages were not approved in the book of Ruth, it scarcely could have been written during the period in which Solomon began his policy of foreign marriages. Also, David’s close friendship with Moab might have prompted someone in his kingdom to write the book, thus presenting objective rationale for David’s actions (see 1 Sm 22:3-5). Consequently, the author may have been someone close to David, possibly Samuel, Nathan, or Abiathar.<\/p>\n<p>The time of the narrative is indicated by the opening statement: “In the days when the judges ruled. . . .” The dates of the judges probably comprise a period of about 300 years, beginning with the judgeship of Othniel and concluding with that of Samson, though Samuel also served as a judge. If the genealogical information is complete in Ruth 4:18-22, the events took place during the life of David’s great-grandfather and mark the birth of his grandfather. Allowing a 35-year generation span, the events would have taken place somewhere about the turn of the 11th century <span>BC<\/span>, or about 100 years before David’s birth.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The book’s purpose is closely related to its date of composition. Assuming an early date, that is, one close to David’s lifetime, its principal thrust must be the authentication of the Davidic line. The book may be considered as a justification for including the godly Moabitess in the nation of Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Introduction (1:1-5)<\/h5>\n<p>Driven by famine, Elimelech, with his wife, Naomi, and his two sons, Mahlon and Chilion, cross the Jordan to stay for a period of time in Moab, where there is sufficient provision. The two sons, after marrying Moabite women, die, and their father dies as well. Naomi is left a widow, with two foreign daughters-in-law.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Return to Bethlehem (1:6-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Hearing reports from Bethlehem that the famine has ended, Naomi makes preparations to return. Both of her daughters-in-law, Orpah and Ruth, accompany her for at least a portion of the journey. Probably thinking of the problems they might encounter as foreigners in Judah, Naomi strongly urges the girls to stay in their own land. Both of the young widows refuse, but Naomi presents the facts. First, she is not pregnant, so the chance of a younger brother fulfilling the levirate responsibility is not imminent. Second, she has no prospects of remarriage and consequently no prospect of further children. Then she also notes that even if the first two conditions were met immediately, the possibility of their waiting was impossible. Orpah is persuaded and kisses her mother-in-law good-bye.<\/p>\n<p>But Ruth “clung to her” (1:18). The verb, having the connotation of being glued to something, is the same verb used of marriage (Gn 2:24). Ruth demonstrated her serious intentions by making five commitments (Ru 1:16-17). In essence, Ruth renounced her former life in order to gain a life that she considered of greater value. She decided to follow the God of Israel and his laws. Ruth’s appeal to the God of Israel was more than equal to Naomi’s pleas, and the two of them returned together.<\/p>\n<p>Their arrival in Bethlehem was traumatic for Naomi. Having left Bethlehem with a husband and two sons, she returned empty. She told her friends to call her “Mara” (bitter). But she had returned at a propitious time, the beginning of the harvest season.<\/p>\n<h5>Reaping in the Fields of Boaz (2:1-23)<\/h5>\n<p>The first verse of the chapter provides the setting for the narrative that follows by introducing Boaz, a wealthy relative of Elimelech.<\/p>\n<p>In the second verse, Ruth volunteered to glean the fields by following the reapers and picking up the small amounts left behind. Gleaners were also permitted to harvest the grain in the corners of the fields—a provision for the poor contained in the law (Lv 19:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Ruth happened to come to the field of Boaz. When he visited this field, he noticed Ruth, inquired about her, and learned her identity. His overseer reported that she had industriously worked the fields from early morning until that time. Boaz, attracted to her because of her loyalty and concern for Naomi, graciously made additional provisions for her. She was given a favored position in reaping, directly behind the main body of reapers. Further, she was to receive water that had been drawn for her by the young men—an unorthodox arrangement.<\/p>\n<p>Ruth, falling before Boaz in a gesture of great humility and respect, asked why she—as a foreigner—should receive such favor. Boaz gave two reasons: her kindness to her mother-in-law, and her spiritual insight, which led her to seek after Israel’s God, “under whose wings you have come to take refuge” (Ru 2:12, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>She was also given a place at the reapers’ table and, upon Boaz’s orders, returned to the fields, this time to reap from the unharvested grain. At the end of the day she returned home to Naomi and told her of the day’s events. Naomi informed Ruth that Boaz had the right of redemption (see discussion below). Ruth returned to his fields until the end of the harvest season.<\/p>\n<h5>Relying upon the Kinsman (3:1-18)<\/h5>\n<p>Naomi advised Ruth to approach Boaz as a <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span><em>,<\/em> or kinsman-redeemer. The plan suggested by Naomi seems peculiar, yet some thoughts may give a certain coloring to it. (1) Naomi seems to have believed that Boaz was the nearest kinsman, being ignorant of the yet nearer one (3:12). Consequently, according to Israelite law (Dt 25:5ff.), it would be the duty of Boaz to marry Ruth to produce offspring, since her husband died. (2) The general presentation of Naomi’s character in this book is that of a God-fearing woman. It is certain that, however curious in its external form, there can be nothing counseled here that is repugnant to God’s law or shocking to a virtuous man such as Boaz. Otherwise, Naomi would have been frustrating her own purpose.<\/p>\n<p>Boaz’s response to Ruth’s actions demonstrated his gentlemanly concerns for her. He explained to her that he was not the nearest kinsman but promised that he would take care of the necessary procedures the next day. Protecting her reputation, Boaz sent her home before daylight. Naomi predicted that Boaz would settle the matter that very day.<\/p>\n<h5>Redeeming the Inheritance (4:1-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Boaz went to the place of business, the city gate. The city gate area comprised the forum where the public affairs of the city were discussed. Boaz indicated that he wished to discuss a matter of business with the nearer kinsman. Ten of the city elders acted as witnesses. The first matter at hand was to deal with the issue of property. Boaz asked this nearer kinsman if he was willing to acquire property for Naomi. This is stated in the traditional stipulation: “Your purchase of the land from Naomi also requires that you marry Ruth, the Moabite widow” (4:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). The nearer kinsman was unwilling to marry Ruth because this would inevitably cost him some financial loss, since he would have to divide his own property with any son of his born to Ruth. Thus he relinquished his rights by the custom of taking off his shoe. (The shoe was symbolic of the land rights that belonged to the inheritance.) So Boaz took the part of being the kinsman-redeemer. The marriage of Boaz and Ruth produced a son who, under Israel’s laws, was reckoned as Naomi’s child and heir.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Message\">Message<\/p>\n<p>First, the book of Ruth traces the lineage of Ruth to David. The completion of that line is in Matthew 1 and finds its fulfillment in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A second teaching is the beauty of God’s grace. A foreigner, even a Moabitess, can be linked with Israel’s blessing.<\/p>\n<p>Theologically, the concept of kinsman-redeemer as a type of Messiah is clearly evident. He must be a blood relative, have the ability to purchase, be willing to buy the inheritance, and be willing to marry the widow of the deceased kinsman.<\/p>\n<p>And finally, the love that Ruth showed to Naomi provides a pattern of devotion. The women of Bethlehem told Naomi, “Your daughter-in-law . . . loves you so much and [is] better to you than seven sons!” (4:15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"RUTH, Book of Preview • Author and Date • Purpose • Content • Message Author and Date The author of the book is unknown. The question of authorship has particular connection with the date of writing, and a few clues provide at least an educated guess. The book must have been written sometime after the beginning of David’s reign. The information in Ruth 4:18-22, which pertains to the historical significance of Ruth as David’s great-grandmother, bears this out. Since foreign marriages were not ...","summary_en":"RUTH, Book of Preview • Author and Date • Purpose • Content • Message Author and Date The author of the book is unknown. The question of authorship has particular connection with the date of writing, and a few clues provide at least an educated guess. The book must have been written sometime after the beginning of David’s reign. The information in Ruth 4:18-22, which pertains to the historical significance of Ruth as David’s great-grandmother, bears this out. Since foreign marriages were not ...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":46028,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:15","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:15<\/strong> <em>care for you in your old age<\/em> (literally <em>cause your old age to be full<\/em>): With the birth of Obed, Naomi’s life was full again (cp. 1:21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:15<\/strong> <em>care for you in your old age<\/em> (literally <em>cause your old age to be full<\/em>): With the birth of Obed, Naomi’s life was full again (cp. 1:21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:15 care for you in your old age (literally cause your old age to be full): With the birth of Obed, Naomi’s life was full again (cp. 1:21).","summary_en":"4:15 care for you in your old age (literally cause your old age to be full): With the birth of Obed, Naomi’s life was full again (cp. 1:21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73654,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:15","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:15<\/strong> <em>care for you in your old age<\/em> (literally <em>cause your old age to be full<\/em>): With the birth of Obed, Naomi’s life was full again (cp. 1:21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:15<\/strong> <em>care for you in your old age<\/em> (literally <em>cause your old age to be full<\/em>): With the birth of Obed, Naomi’s life was full again (cp. 1:21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:15 care for you in your old age (literally cause your old age to be full): With the birth of Obed, Naomi’s life was full again (cp. 1:21).","summary_en":"4:15 care for you in your old age (literally cause your old age to be full): With the birth of Obed, Naomi’s life was full again (cp. 1:21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101280,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:15","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:15<\/strong> <em>care for you in your old age<\/em> (literally <em>cause your old age to be full<\/em>): With the birth of Obed, Naomi’s life was full again (cp. 1:21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:15<\/strong> <em>care for you in your old age<\/em> (literally <em>cause your old age to be full<\/em>): With the birth of Obed, Naomi’s life was full again (cp. 1:21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:15 care for you in your old age (literally cause your old age to be full): With the birth of Obed, Naomi’s life was full again (cp. 1:21).","summary_en":"4:15 care for you in your old age (literally cause your old age to be full): With the birth of Obed, Naomi’s life was full again (cp. 1:21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128906,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:15","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:15<\/strong> <em>care for you in your old age<\/em> (literally <em>cause your old age to be full<\/em>): With the birth of Obed, Naomi’s life was full again (cp. 1:21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:15<\/strong> <em>care for you in your old age<\/em> (literally <em>cause your old age to be full<\/em>): With the birth of Obed, Naomi’s life was full again (cp. 1:21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:15 care for you in your old age (literally cause your old age to be full): With the birth of Obed, Naomi’s life was full again (cp. 1:21).","summary_en":"4:15 care for you in your old age (literally cause your old age to be full): With the birth of Obed, Naomi’s life was full again (cp. 1:21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":27978,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Nurse","title_en":"Nurse","content_ro":"<h3>NURSE<\/h3>\n<p>A woman who took care of an infant that did not belong to her, or a man who took care of young children. The work was limited to the nursing and caring of an infant. Women usually took care of their own children, such as Sarah (Gn 21:7) and Hannah (1 Sm 1:23). A wet nurse often became a part of the family circle and had a special place. Rebekah had a nurse, and when she passed away, the woman was even mentioned in the biblical text: “Now Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse, died and was buried under the oak below Bethel. So it was named Allon Bacuth” (Gn 35:8, <span>niv<\/span>). Moses’ mother became his nurse, as she was being paid by Pharaoh’s daughter (Ex 2:7). Royal sons were cared for by nurses, as in the case of Joash, who was hidden with his nurse by Jehosheba his aunt (2 Kgs 11:2). Since Joash was hidden for six years and was seven when he acceded to the throne, Joash was about a year old when he was hidden—and his nurse must have been a wet nurse.<\/p>\n<p>Royal sons received special care and were under the supervision of a nurse after they had been suckled. Children were nursed up to the age of three, and when they were weaned, there was a feast (Gn 21:8; 1 Sm 1:23-24). Thereafter, a nurse-teacher took charge of the youngster. Mephibosheth was five years old when his nurse fell with him, causing him to be lame (2 Sm 4:4). Naomi took care of her grandson as a nurse (Ru 4:16). It is probable that male nurses were used as teachers for the young aristocrats, such as we find in 2 Kings 10:1, when it is said that Ahab’s children had tutors (cf. also v 5). In this sense we must understand Moses’ reference to himself, too, as a “nurse”: “Did I conceive all these people? Did I give them birth? Why do you tell me to carry them in my arms, as a nurse carries an infant, to the land you promised on oath to their forefathers?” (Nm 11:12, <span>niv<\/span>). Paul saw himself, too, as a “nurse” to the church (1 Thes 2:7).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NURSE<\/h3>\n<p>A woman who took care of an infant that did not belong to her, or a man who took care of young children. The work was limited to the nursing and caring of an infant. Women usually took care of their own children, such as Sarah (Gn 21:7) and Hannah (1 Sm 1:23). A wet nurse often became a part of the family circle and had a special place. Rebekah had a nurse, and when she passed away, the woman was even mentioned in the biblical text: “Now Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse, died and was buried under the oak below Bethel. So it was named Allon Bacuth” (Gn 35:8, <span>niv<\/span>). Moses’ mother became his nurse, as she was being paid by Pharaoh’s daughter (Ex 2:7). Royal sons were cared for by nurses, as in the case of Joash, who was hidden with his nurse by Jehosheba his aunt (2 Kgs 11:2). Since Joash was hidden for six years and was seven when he acceded to the throne, Joash was about a year old when he was hidden—and his nurse must have been a wet nurse.<\/p>\n<p>Royal sons received special care and were under the supervision of a nurse after they had been suckled. Children were nursed up to the age of three, and when they were weaned, there was a feast (Gn 21:8; 1 Sm 1:23-24). Thereafter, a nurse-teacher took charge of the youngster. Mephibosheth was five years old when his nurse fell with him, causing him to be lame (2 Sm 4:4). Naomi took care of her grandson as a nurse (Ru 4:16). It is probable that male nurses were used as teachers for the young aristocrats, such as we find in 2 Kings 10:1, when it is said that Ahab’s children had tutors (cf. also v 5). In this sense we must understand Moses’ reference to himself, too, as a “nurse”: “Did I conceive all these people? Did I give them birth? Why do you tell me to carry them in my arms, as a nurse carries an infant, to the land you promised on oath to their forefathers?” (Nm 11:12, <span>niv<\/span>). Paul saw himself, too, as a “nurse” to the church (1 Thes 2:7).<\/p>","summary_ro":"NURSE A woman who took care of an infant that did not belong to her, or a man who took care of young children. The work was limited to the nursing and caring of an infant. Women usually took care of their own children, such as Sarah (Gn 21:7) and Hannah (1 Sm 1:23). A wet nurse often became a part of the family circle and had a special place. Rebekah had a nurse, and when she passed away, the woman was even mentioned in the biblical text: “Now Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse, died and was buried und...","summary_en":"NURSE A woman who took care of an infant that did not belong to her, or a man who took care of young children. The work was limited to the nursing and caring of an infant. Women usually took care of their own children, such as Sarah (Gn 21:7) and Hannah (1 Sm 1:23). A wet nurse often became a part of the family circle and had a special place. Rebekah had a nurse, and when she passed away, the woman was even mentioned in the biblical text: “Now Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse, died and was buried und...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"17":[{"id":19374,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesse (Person)","title_en":"Jesse (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>JESSE (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>Son of Obed and grandson of Ruth and Boaz (Ru 4:17, 22). Jesse was a shepherd from Bethlehem. He had eight sons, of whom David was the youngest. He had at least two daughters, Zeruiah and Abigail, who became mothers of famous warriors.<\/p>\n<p>When Samuel went to Jesse’s home to search for and anoint a king, Jesse did not at first feel it worthwhile to call David for examination (1 Sm 16:11). Later he sent David to play the lyre for Saul (vv 19-21). After David became a fugitive from Saul, Jesse and others of the family came to David in the cave of Adullam. David then brought his father and mother to Mizpah in Moab (22:3). Nothing further is heard of Jesse.<\/p>\n<p>After Saul broke with David, he commonly spoke of David derisively as a “son of Jesse” to underscore his humble origins (1 Sm 20:31; 22:7). This same emphasis on Jesse’s modest station in life is found in such messianic references as Isaiah 11:1 and 10, which speak of the “shoot from the stump of Jesse” and “the root of Jesse” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> David; Jesse, Root of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESSE (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>Son of Obed and grandson of Ruth and Boaz (Ru 4:17, 22). Jesse was a shepherd from Bethlehem. He had eight sons, of whom David was the youngest. He had at least two daughters, Zeruiah and Abigail, who became mothers of famous warriors.<\/p>\n<p>When Samuel went to Jesse’s home to search for and anoint a king, Jesse did not at first feel it worthwhile to call David for examination (1 Sm 16:11). Later he sent David to play the lyre for Saul (vv 19-21). After David became a fugitive from Saul, Jesse and others of the family came to David in the cave of Adullam. David then brought his father and mother to Mizpah in Moab (22:3). Nothing further is heard of Jesse.<\/p>\n<p>After Saul broke with David, he commonly spoke of David derisively as a “son of Jesse” to underscore his humble origins (1 Sm 20:31; 22:7). This same emphasis on Jesse’s modest station in life is found in such messianic references as Isaiah 11:1 and 10, which speak of the “shoot from the stump of Jesse” and “the root of Jesse” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> David; Jesse, Root of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESSE (Person) Son of Obed and grandson of Ruth and Boaz (Ru 4:17, 22). Jesse was a shepherd from Bethlehem. He had eight sons, of whom David was the youngest. He had at least two daughters, Zeruiah and Abigail, who became mothers of famous warriors. When Samuel went to Jesse’s home to search for and anoint a king, Jesse did not at first feel it worthwhile to call David for examination (1 Sm 16:11). Later he sent David to play the lyre for Saul (vv 19-21). After David became a fugitive from S...","summary_en":"JESSE (Person) Son of Obed and grandson of Ruth and Boaz (Ru 4:17, 22). Jesse was a shepherd from Bethlehem. He had eight sons, of whom David was the youngest. He had at least two daughters, Zeruiah and Abigail, who became mothers of famous warriors. When Samuel went to Jesse’s home to search for and anoint a king, Jesse did not at first feel it worthwhile to call David for examination (1 Sm 16:11). Later he sent David to play the lyre for Saul (vv 19-21). After David became a fugitive from S...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28061,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Obed","title_en":"Obed","content_ro":"<h3>OBED<\/h3>\n<li>1. Ruth and Boaz’s first child, listed among the ancestors of Jesus (Ru 4:17, 21-22; 1 Chr 2:12; Mt 1:5; Lk 3:32). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>\n<li>2. Jerahmeelite and Ephlal’s son (1 Chr 2:37-38).<\/li>\n<li>3. One of David’s mighty men (1 Chr 11:47).<\/li>\n<li>4. Shemaiah’s son and an able leader who ruled his father’s house (1 Chr 26:6-7).<\/li>\n<li>5. Father of Azariah, a captain of Jehoiada (2 Chr 23:1).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>OBED<\/h3>\n<li>1. Ruth and Boaz’s first child, listed among the ancestors of Jesus (Ru 4:17, 21-22; 1 Chr 2:12; Mt 1:5; Lk 3:32). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>\n<li>2. Jerahmeelite and Ephlal’s son (1 Chr 2:37-38).<\/li>\n<li>3. One of David’s mighty men (1 Chr 11:47).<\/li>\n<li>4. Shemaiah’s son and an able leader who ruled his father’s house (1 Chr 26:6-7).<\/li>\n<li>5. Father of Azariah, a captain of Jehoiada (2 Chr 23:1).<\/li>","summary_ro":"OBED 1. Ruth and Boaz’s first child, listed among the ancestors of Jesus (Ru 4:17, 21-22; 1 Chr 2:12; Mt 1:5; Lk 3:32). See Genealogy of Jesus Christ. 2. Jerahmeelite and Ephlal’s son (1 Chr 2:37-38). 3. One of David’s mighty men (1 Chr 11:47). 4. Shemaiah’s son and an able leader who ruled his father’s house (1 Chr 26:6-7). 5. Father of Azariah, a captain of Jehoiada (2 Chr 23:1).","summary_en":"OBED 1. Ruth and Boaz’s first child, listed among the ancestors of Jesus (Ru 4:17, 21-22; 1 Chr 2:12; Mt 1:5; Lk 3:32). See Genealogy of Jesus Christ. 2. Jerahmeelite and Ephlal’s son (1 Chr 2:37-38). 3. One of David’s mighty men (1 Chr 11:47). 4. Shemaiah’s son and an able leader who ruled his father’s house (1 Chr 26:6-7). 5. Father of Azariah, a captain of Jehoiada (2 Chr 23:1).","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":41292,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"David","title_en":"David","content_ro":"<h3>David<\/h3>\n<p>David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance.<\/p>\n<p>David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use David to complete the conquest of the land.<\/p>\n<p>As a youth, David was a simple shepherd, watching his father’s sheep (1 Sam 16:11; 17:14-15). His life took an unexpected turn when the prophet Samuel came to Jesse and anointed David as the next king of Israel. However, David’s kingship was not initiated by a coup or an assassination. In fact, David became a faithful servant to King Saul. David first entered Saul’s service as a musician, playing songs that soothed Saul’s tormented soul (16:14-23). This service anticipated David’s role as the composer of many of the psalms. The youthful David also helped Saul by famously defeating the Philistine champion Goliath in individual combat (17:32-51). This victory anticipated David’s role as a victorious military leader.<\/p>\n<p>Although David was loyal, Saul grew deeply suspicious of him, and David had to flee. He was able to escape with help from Saul’s own children, Jonathan and Michal. David led a virtual kingdom in exile. He had a standing army of six hundred men. The prophet Gad and the priest Abiathar were also with him, providing direction and guidance from the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>God’s long-suffering patience finally ran out with Saul, and Saul died on the battlefield. Yet it was still not easy for David to establish his rule over all Israel. The tribe of Judah immediately proclaimed him its king, but at first the northern tribes chose Ishbosheth, a son of Saul, to be their leader. Ishbosheth was not a powerful or good leader; he only stayed in power because of the protection of his father’s military leader, Abner. However, Ishbosheth foolishly insulted Abner, so the general helped turn the kingdom over to David.<\/p>\n<p>As king over a united Israel, David proceeded to solidify the kingdom. He and his men captured Jerusalem from the Jebusites and made this central city his capital. He also expelled the remaining Philistines from the land. He then brought the Ark of the Covenant into Jerusalem. David wanted to build a permanent temple to God in Jerusalem to replace the Tabernacle. God denied this wish, but he showed his love for David by entering into a covenant with him that established his descendants as a dynasty (2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s life soon took a turn for the worse, however (see 2 Sam 11–12). At a time when he probably should have been on the battlefield with his army, he was lounging around on the palace roof. He saw a beautiful woman named Bathsheba taking a bath. He wanted her, so, like a Near Eastern despot, he took her. She became pregnant, and his attempt to cover up his adultery failed. In a desperate attempt to keep things secret, he had her husband, Uriah, killed. But not even a great king like David can keep secrets from God, and God sent his prophet Nathan to confront David. David repented (see Pss 32, 51), but the consequences of his actions plagued his family and the rest of his reign.<\/p>\n<p>From that point on, David’s family fell apart. David’s son Amnon raped his half sister Tamar (2 Sam 13:1-14). Her brother Absalom then murdered Amnon (2 Sam 13:20-29). Absalom later created a civil war as he tried to steal the throne from his father (2 Sam 15–18). Another son, Adonijah, tried to take the throne from David by having himself proclaimed king while his father was still alive (1 Kgs 1:5-10). But David was able to muster enough strength to ensure that Solomon would succeed him (1 Kgs 1:28-40). David died, Solomon was proclaimed king, and David’s long dynasty began (as promised in 2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s successors seldom measured up. Only rarely did his descendants lead the nation to worship God faithfully; the united monarchy did not even outlive Solomon. In the centuries that followed, the descendants of David ruled only Judah in the south. Eventually, the kingdom of Judah was destroyed. Never again did a descendant of David reign as king in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>What, then, of the promise to David that “your throne will be secure forever” (2 Sam 7:16)? The New Testament points to Jesus. He was the descendant of David, and God proclaimed him the Christ, or Messiah—the anointed king (see Matt 1:1; 9:27; 12:23; Mark 10:47-48; 11:10; 12:35-37; Luke 18:38-39; 20:41-44; John 7:42; Rev 5:5; 22:16). The life and rule of David foreshadows the messianic reign of Jesus Christ, which will last forever (see Luke 1:32-33; Rev 11:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ruth 4:13-22; 1 Sam 16:1–17:58; 18:1–27:12; 29:1–30:31; 2 Sam 1:1–24:25; 1 Kgs 1:1–2:12; 1 Chr 11:1–29:30; Pss 1–32, 34–41, 51–71, 86, 91–110, 122, 124, 131, 133, 138–145; Matt 1:1; 9:27; 22:41-46; Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44; John 7:40-44; Acts 2:22-37; 13:20-43; Rom 1:3; Rev 22:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>David<\/h3>\n<p>David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance.<\/p>\n<p>David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use David to complete the conquest of the land.<\/p>\n<p>As a youth, David was a simple shepherd, watching his father’s sheep (1 Sam 16:11; 17:14-15). His life took an unexpected turn when the prophet Samuel came to Jesse and anointed David as the next king of Israel. However, David’s kingship was not initiated by a coup or an assassination. In fact, David became a faithful servant to King Saul. David first entered Saul’s service as a musician, playing songs that soothed Saul’s tormented soul (16:14-23). This service anticipated David’s role as the composer of many of the psalms. The youthful David also helped Saul by famously defeating the Philistine champion Goliath in individual combat (17:32-51). This victory anticipated David’s role as a victorious military leader.<\/p>\n<p>Although David was loyal, Saul grew deeply suspicious of him, and David had to flee. He was able to escape with help from Saul’s own children, Jonathan and Michal. David led a virtual kingdom in exile. He had a standing army of six hundred men. The prophet Gad and the priest Abiathar were also with him, providing direction and guidance from the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>God’s long-suffering patience finally ran out with Saul, and Saul died on the battlefield. Yet it was still not easy for David to establish his rule over all Israel. The tribe of Judah immediately proclaimed him its king, but at first the northern tribes chose Ishbosheth, a son of Saul, to be their leader. Ishbosheth was not a powerful or good leader; he only stayed in power because of the protection of his father’s military leader, Abner. However, Ishbosheth foolishly insulted Abner, so the general helped turn the kingdom over to David.<\/p>\n<p>As king over a united Israel, David proceeded to solidify the kingdom. He and his men captured Jerusalem from the Jebusites and made this central city his capital. He also expelled the remaining Philistines from the land. He then brought the Ark of the Covenant into Jerusalem. David wanted to build a permanent temple to God in Jerusalem to replace the Tabernacle. God denied this wish, but he showed his love for David by entering into a covenant with him that established his descendants as a dynasty (2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s life soon took a turn for the worse, however (see 2 Sam 11–12). At a time when he probably should have been on the battlefield with his army, he was lounging around on the palace roof. He saw a beautiful woman named Bathsheba taking a bath. He wanted her, so, like a Near Eastern despot, he took her. She became pregnant, and his attempt to cover up his adultery failed. In a desperate attempt to keep things secret, he had her husband, Uriah, killed. But not even a great king like David can keep secrets from God, and God sent his prophet Nathan to confront David. David repented (see Pss 32, 51), but the consequences of his actions plagued his family and the rest of his reign.<\/p>\n<p>From that point on, David’s family fell apart. David’s son Amnon raped his half sister Tamar (2 Sam 13:1-14). Her brother Absalom then murdered Amnon (2 Sam 13:20-29). Absalom later created a civil war as he tried to steal the throne from his father (2 Sam 15–18). Another son, Adonijah, tried to take the throne from David by having himself proclaimed king while his father was still alive (1 Kgs 1:5-10). But David was able to muster enough strength to ensure that Solomon would succeed him (1 Kgs 1:28-40). David died, Solomon was proclaimed king, and David’s long dynasty began (as promised in 2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s successors seldom measured up. Only rarely did his descendants lead the nation to worship God faithfully; the united monarchy did not even outlive Solomon. In the centuries that followed, the descendants of David ruled only Judah in the south. Eventually, the kingdom of Judah was destroyed. Never again did a descendant of David reign as king in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>What, then, of the promise to David that “your throne will be secure forever” (2 Sam 7:16)? The New Testament points to Jesus. He was the descendant of David, and God proclaimed him the Christ, or Messiah—the anointed king (see Matt 1:1; 9:27; 12:23; Mark 10:47-48; 11:10; 12:35-37; Luke 18:38-39; 20:41-44; John 7:42; Rev 5:5; 22:16). The life and rule of David foreshadows the messianic reign of Jesus Christ, which will last forever (see Luke 1:32-33; Rev 11:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ruth 4:13-22; 1 Sam 16:1–17:58; 18:1–27:12; 29:1–30:31; 2 Sam 1:1–24:25; 1 Kgs 1:1–2:12; 1 Chr 11:1–29:30; Pss 1–32, 34–41, 51–71, 86, 91–110, 122, 124, 131, 133, 138–145; Matt 1:1; 9:27; 22:41-46; Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44; John 7:40-44; Acts 2:22-37; 13:20-43; Rom 1:3; Rev 22:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"David David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance. David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use Dav...","summary_en":"David David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance. David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use Dav...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":68918,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"David","title_en":"David","content_ro":"<h3>David<\/h3>\n<p>David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance.<\/p>\n<p>David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use David to complete the conquest of the land.<\/p>\n<p>As a youth, David was a simple shepherd, watching his father’s sheep (1 Sam 16:11; 17:14-15). His life took an unexpected turn when the prophet Samuel came to Jesse and anointed David as the next king of Israel. However, David’s kingship was not initiated by a coup or an assassination. In fact, David became a faithful servant to King Saul. David first entered Saul’s service as a musician, playing songs that soothed Saul’s tormented soul (16:14-23). This service anticipated David’s role as the composer of many of the psalms. The youthful David also helped Saul by famously defeating the Philistine champion Goliath in individual combat (17:32-51). This victory anticipated David’s role as a victorious military leader.<\/p>\n<p>Although David was loyal, Saul grew deeply suspicious of him, and David had to flee. He was able to escape with help from Saul’s own children, Jonathan and Michal. David led a virtual kingdom in exile. He had a standing army of six hundred men. The prophet Gad and the priest Abiathar were also with him, providing direction and guidance from the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>God’s long-suffering patience finally ran out with Saul, and Saul died on the battlefield. Yet it was still not easy for David to establish his rule over all Israel. The tribe of Judah immediately proclaimed him its king, but at first the northern tribes chose Ishbosheth, a son of Saul, to be their leader. Ishbosheth was not a powerful or good leader; he only stayed in power because of the protection of his father’s military leader, Abner. However, Ishbosheth foolishly insulted Abner, so the general helped turn the kingdom over to David.<\/p>\n<p>As king over a united Israel, David proceeded to solidify the kingdom. He and his men captured Jerusalem from the Jebusites and made this central city his capital. He also expelled the remaining Philistines from the land. He then brought the Ark of the Covenant into Jerusalem. David wanted to build a permanent temple to God in Jerusalem to replace the Tabernacle. God denied this wish, but he showed his love for David by entering into a covenant with him that established his descendants as a dynasty (2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s life soon took a turn for the worse, however (see 2 Sam 11–12). At a time when he probably should have been on the battlefield with his army, he was lounging around on the palace roof. He saw a beautiful woman named Bathsheba taking a bath. He wanted her, so, like a Near Eastern despot, he took her. She became pregnant, and his attempt to cover up his adultery failed. In a desperate attempt to keep things secret, he had her husband, Uriah, killed. But not even a great king like David can keep secrets from God, and God sent his prophet Nathan to confront David. David repented (see Pss 32, 51), but the consequences of his actions plagued his family and the rest of his reign.<\/p>\n<p>From that point on, David’s family fell apart. David’s son Amnon raped his half sister Tamar (2 Sam 13:1-14). Her brother Absalom then murdered Amnon (2 Sam 13:20-29). Absalom later created a civil war as he tried to steal the throne from his father (2 Sam 15–18). Another son, Adonijah, tried to take the throne from David by having himself proclaimed king while his father was still alive (1 Kgs 1:5-10). But David was able to muster enough strength to ensure that Solomon would succeed him (1 Kgs 1:28-40). David died, Solomon was proclaimed king, and David’s long dynasty began (as promised in 2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s successors seldom measured up. Only rarely did his descendants lead the nation to worship God faithfully; the united monarchy did not even outlive Solomon. In the centuries that followed, the descendants of David ruled only Judah in the south. Eventually, the kingdom of Judah was destroyed. Never again did a descendant of David reign as king in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>What, then, of the promise to David that “your throne will be secure forever” (2 Sam 7:16)? The New Testament points to Jesus. He was the descendant of David, and God proclaimed him the Christ, or Messiah—the anointed king (see Matt 1:1; 9:27; 12:23; Mark 10:47-48; 11:10; 12:35-37; Luke 18:38-39; 20:41-44; John 7:42; Rev 5:5; 22:16). The life and rule of David foreshadows the messianic reign of Jesus Christ, which will last forever (see Luke 1:32-33; Rev 11:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ruth 4:13-22; 1 Sam 16:1–17:58; 18:1–27:12; 29:1–30:31; 2 Sam 1:1–24:25; 1 Kgs 1:1–2:12; 1 Chr 11:1–29:30; Pss 1–32, 34–41, 51–71, 86, 91–110, 122, 124, 131, 133, 138–145; Matt 1:1; 9:27; 22:41-46; Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44; John 7:40-44; Acts 2:22-37; 13:20-43; Rom 1:3; Rev 22:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>David<\/h3>\n<p>David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance.<\/p>\n<p>David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use David to complete the conquest of the land.<\/p>\n<p>As a youth, David was a simple shepherd, watching his father’s sheep (1 Sam 16:11; 17:14-15). His life took an unexpected turn when the prophet Samuel came to Jesse and anointed David as the next king of Israel. However, David’s kingship was not initiated by a coup or an assassination. In fact, David became a faithful servant to King Saul. David first entered Saul’s service as a musician, playing songs that soothed Saul’s tormented soul (16:14-23). This service anticipated David’s role as the composer of many of the psalms. The youthful David also helped Saul by famously defeating the Philistine champion Goliath in individual combat (17:32-51). This victory anticipated David’s role as a victorious military leader.<\/p>\n<p>Although David was loyal, Saul grew deeply suspicious of him, and David had to flee. He was able to escape with help from Saul’s own children, Jonathan and Michal. David led a virtual kingdom in exile. He had a standing army of six hundred men. The prophet Gad and the priest Abiathar were also with him, providing direction and guidance from the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>God’s long-suffering patience finally ran out with Saul, and Saul died on the battlefield. Yet it was still not easy for David to establish his rule over all Israel. The tribe of Judah immediately proclaimed him its king, but at first the northern tribes chose Ishbosheth, a son of Saul, to be their leader. Ishbosheth was not a powerful or good leader; he only stayed in power because of the protection of his father’s military leader, Abner. However, Ishbosheth foolishly insulted Abner, so the general helped turn the kingdom over to David.<\/p>\n<p>As king over a united Israel, David proceeded to solidify the kingdom. He and his men captured Jerusalem from the Jebusites and made this central city his capital. He also expelled the remaining Philistines from the land. He then brought the Ark of the Covenant into Jerusalem. David wanted to build a permanent temple to God in Jerusalem to replace the Tabernacle. God denied this wish, but he showed his love for David by entering into a covenant with him that established his descendants as a dynasty (2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s life soon took a turn for the worse, however (see 2 Sam 11–12). At a time when he probably should have been on the battlefield with his army, he was lounging around on the palace roof. He saw a beautiful woman named Bathsheba taking a bath. He wanted her, so, like a Near Eastern despot, he took her. She became pregnant, and his attempt to cover up his adultery failed. In a desperate attempt to keep things secret, he had her husband, Uriah, killed. But not even a great king like David can keep secrets from God, and God sent his prophet Nathan to confront David. David repented (see Pss 32, 51), but the consequences of his actions plagued his family and the rest of his reign.<\/p>\n<p>From that point on, David’s family fell apart. David’s son Amnon raped his half sister Tamar (2 Sam 13:1-14). Her brother Absalom then murdered Amnon (2 Sam 13:20-29). Absalom later created a civil war as he tried to steal the throne from his father (2 Sam 15–18). Another son, Adonijah, tried to take the throne from David by having himself proclaimed king while his father was still alive (1 Kgs 1:5-10). But David was able to muster enough strength to ensure that Solomon would succeed him (1 Kgs 1:28-40). David died, Solomon was proclaimed king, and David’s long dynasty began (as promised in 2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s successors seldom measured up. Only rarely did his descendants lead the nation to worship God faithfully; the united monarchy did not even outlive Solomon. In the centuries that followed, the descendants of David ruled only Judah in the south. Eventually, the kingdom of Judah was destroyed. Never again did a descendant of David reign as king in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>What, then, of the promise to David that “your throne will be secure forever” (2 Sam 7:16)? The New Testament points to Jesus. He was the descendant of David, and God proclaimed him the Christ, or Messiah—the anointed king (see Matt 1:1; 9:27; 12:23; Mark 10:47-48; 11:10; 12:35-37; Luke 18:38-39; 20:41-44; John 7:42; Rev 5:5; 22:16). The life and rule of David foreshadows the messianic reign of Jesus Christ, which will last forever (see Luke 1:32-33; Rev 11:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ruth 4:13-22; 1 Sam 16:1–17:58; 18:1–27:12; 29:1–30:31; 2 Sam 1:1–24:25; 1 Kgs 1:1–2:12; 1 Chr 11:1–29:30; Pss 1–32, 34–41, 51–71, 86, 91–110, 122, 124, 131, 133, 138–145; Matt 1:1; 9:27; 22:41-46; Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44; John 7:40-44; Acts 2:22-37; 13:20-43; Rom 1:3; Rev 22:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"David David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance. David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use Dav...","summary_en":"David David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance. David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use Dav...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":96544,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"David","title_en":"David","content_ro":"<h3>David<\/h3>\n<p>David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance.<\/p>\n<p>David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use David to complete the conquest of the land.<\/p>\n<p>As a youth, David was a simple shepherd, watching his father’s sheep (1 Sam 16:11; 17:14-15). His life took an unexpected turn when the prophet Samuel came to Jesse and anointed David as the next king of Israel. However, David’s kingship was not initiated by a coup or an assassination. In fact, David became a faithful servant to King Saul. David first entered Saul’s service as a musician, playing songs that soothed Saul’s tormented soul (16:14-23). This service anticipated David’s role as the composer of many of the psalms. The youthful David also helped Saul by famously defeating the Philistine champion Goliath in individual combat (17:32-51). This victory anticipated David’s role as a victorious military leader.<\/p>\n<p>Although David was loyal, Saul grew deeply suspicious of him, and David had to flee. He was able to escape with help from Saul’s own children, Jonathan and Michal. David led a virtual kingdom in exile. He had a standing army of six hundred men. The prophet Gad and the priest Abiathar were also with him, providing direction and guidance from the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>God’s long-suffering patience finally ran out with Saul, and Saul died on the battlefield. Yet it was still not easy for David to establish his rule over all Israel. The tribe of Judah immediately proclaimed him its king, but at first the northern tribes chose Ishbosheth, a son of Saul, to be their leader. Ishbosheth was not a powerful or good leader; he only stayed in power because of the protection of his father’s military leader, Abner. However, Ishbosheth foolishly insulted Abner, so the general helped turn the kingdom over to David.<\/p>\n<p>As king over a united Israel, David proceeded to solidify the kingdom. He and his men captured Jerusalem from the Jebusites and made this central city his capital. He also expelled the remaining Philistines from the land. He then brought the Ark of the Covenant into Jerusalem. David wanted to build a permanent temple to God in Jerusalem to replace the Tabernacle. God denied this wish, but he showed his love for David by entering into a covenant with him that established his descendants as a dynasty (2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s life soon took a turn for the worse, however (see 2 Sam 11–12). At a time when he probably should have been on the battlefield with his army, he was lounging around on the palace roof. He saw a beautiful woman named Bathsheba taking a bath. He wanted her, so, like a Near Eastern despot, he took her. She became pregnant, and his attempt to cover up his adultery failed. In a desperate attempt to keep things secret, he had her husband, Uriah, killed. But not even a great king like David can keep secrets from God, and God sent his prophet Nathan to confront David. David repented (see Pss 32, 51), but the consequences of his actions plagued his family and the rest of his reign.<\/p>\n<p>From that point on, David’s family fell apart. David’s son Amnon raped his half sister Tamar (2 Sam 13:1-14). Her brother Absalom then murdered Amnon (2 Sam 13:20-29). Absalom later created a civil war as he tried to steal the throne from his father (2 Sam 15–18). Another son, Adonijah, tried to take the throne from David by having himself proclaimed king while his father was still alive (1 Kgs 1:5-10). But David was able to muster enough strength to ensure that Solomon would succeed him (1 Kgs 1:28-40). David died, Solomon was proclaimed king, and David’s long dynasty began (as promised in 2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s successors seldom measured up. Only rarely did his descendants lead the nation to worship God faithfully; the united monarchy did not even outlive Solomon. In the centuries that followed, the descendants of David ruled only Judah in the south. Eventually, the kingdom of Judah was destroyed. Never again did a descendant of David reign as king in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>What, then, of the promise to David that “your throne will be secure forever” (2 Sam 7:16)? The New Testament points to Jesus. He was the descendant of David, and God proclaimed him the Christ, or Messiah—the anointed king (see Matt 1:1; 9:27; 12:23; Mark 10:47-48; 11:10; 12:35-37; Luke 18:38-39; 20:41-44; John 7:42; Rev 5:5; 22:16). The life and rule of David foreshadows the messianic reign of Jesus Christ, which will last forever (see Luke 1:32-33; Rev 11:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ruth 4:13-22; 1 Sam 16:1–17:58; 18:1–27:12; 29:1–30:31; 2 Sam 1:1–24:25; 1 Kgs 1:1–2:12; 1 Chr 11:1–29:30; Pss 1–32, 34–41, 51–71, 86, 91–110, 122, 124, 131, 133, 138–145; Matt 1:1; 9:27; 22:41-46; Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44; John 7:40-44; Acts 2:22-37; 13:20-43; Rom 1:3; Rev 22:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>David<\/h3>\n<p>David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance.<\/p>\n<p>David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use David to complete the conquest of the land.<\/p>\n<p>As a youth, David was a simple shepherd, watching his father’s sheep (1 Sam 16:11; 17:14-15). His life took an unexpected turn when the prophet Samuel came to Jesse and anointed David as the next king of Israel. However, David’s kingship was not initiated by a coup or an assassination. In fact, David became a faithful servant to King Saul. David first entered Saul’s service as a musician, playing songs that soothed Saul’s tormented soul (16:14-23). This service anticipated David’s role as the composer of many of the psalms. The youthful David also helped Saul by famously defeating the Philistine champion Goliath in individual combat (17:32-51). This victory anticipated David’s role as a victorious military leader.<\/p>\n<p>Although David was loyal, Saul grew deeply suspicious of him, and David had to flee. He was able to escape with help from Saul’s own children, Jonathan and Michal. David led a virtual kingdom in exile. He had a standing army of six hundred men. The prophet Gad and the priest Abiathar were also with him, providing direction and guidance from the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>God’s long-suffering patience finally ran out with Saul, and Saul died on the battlefield. Yet it was still not easy for David to establish his rule over all Israel. The tribe of Judah immediately proclaimed him its king, but at first the northern tribes chose Ishbosheth, a son of Saul, to be their leader. Ishbosheth was not a powerful or good leader; he only stayed in power because of the protection of his father’s military leader, Abner. However, Ishbosheth foolishly insulted Abner, so the general helped turn the kingdom over to David.<\/p>\n<p>As king over a united Israel, David proceeded to solidify the kingdom. He and his men captured Jerusalem from the Jebusites and made this central city his capital. He also expelled the remaining Philistines from the land. He then brought the Ark of the Covenant into Jerusalem. David wanted to build a permanent temple to God in Jerusalem to replace the Tabernacle. God denied this wish, but he showed his love for David by entering into a covenant with him that established his descendants as a dynasty (2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s life soon took a turn for the worse, however (see 2 Sam 11–12). At a time when he probably should have been on the battlefield with his army, he was lounging around on the palace roof. He saw a beautiful woman named Bathsheba taking a bath. He wanted her, so, like a Near Eastern despot, he took her. She became pregnant, and his attempt to cover up his adultery failed. In a desperate attempt to keep things secret, he had her husband, Uriah, killed. But not even a great king like David can keep secrets from God, and God sent his prophet Nathan to confront David. David repented (see Pss 32, 51), but the consequences of his actions plagued his family and the rest of his reign.<\/p>\n<p>From that point on, David’s family fell apart. David’s son Amnon raped his half sister Tamar (2 Sam 13:1-14). Her brother Absalom then murdered Amnon (2 Sam 13:20-29). Absalom later created a civil war as he tried to steal the throne from his father (2 Sam 15–18). Another son, Adonijah, tried to take the throne from David by having himself proclaimed king while his father was still alive (1 Kgs 1:5-10). But David was able to muster enough strength to ensure that Solomon would succeed him (1 Kgs 1:28-40). David died, Solomon was proclaimed king, and David’s long dynasty began (as promised in 2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s successors seldom measured up. Only rarely did his descendants lead the nation to worship God faithfully; the united monarchy did not even outlive Solomon. In the centuries that followed, the descendants of David ruled only Judah in the south. Eventually, the kingdom of Judah was destroyed. Never again did a descendant of David reign as king in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>What, then, of the promise to David that “your throne will be secure forever” (2 Sam 7:16)? The New Testament points to Jesus. He was the descendant of David, and God proclaimed him the Christ, or Messiah—the anointed king (see Matt 1:1; 9:27; 12:23; Mark 10:47-48; 11:10; 12:35-37; Luke 18:38-39; 20:41-44; John 7:42; Rev 5:5; 22:16). The life and rule of David foreshadows the messianic reign of Jesus Christ, which will last forever (see Luke 1:32-33; Rev 11:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ruth 4:13-22; 1 Sam 16:1–17:58; 18:1–27:12; 29:1–30:31; 2 Sam 1:1–24:25; 1 Kgs 1:1–2:12; 1 Chr 11:1–29:30; Pss 1–32, 34–41, 51–71, 86, 91–110, 122, 124, 131, 133, 138–145; Matt 1:1; 9:27; 22:41-46; Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44; John 7:40-44; Acts 2:22-37; 13:20-43; Rom 1:3; Rev 22:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"David David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance. David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use Dav...","summary_en":"David David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance. David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use Dav...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124170,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"David","title_en":"David","content_ro":"<h3>David<\/h3>\n<p>David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance.<\/p>\n<p>David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use David to complete the conquest of the land.<\/p>\n<p>As a youth, David was a simple shepherd, watching his father’s sheep (1 Sam 16:11; 17:14-15). His life took an unexpected turn when the prophet Samuel came to Jesse and anointed David as the next king of Israel. However, David’s kingship was not initiated by a coup or an assassination. In fact, David became a faithful servant to King Saul. David first entered Saul’s service as a musician, playing songs that soothed Saul’s tormented soul (16:14-23). This service anticipated David’s role as the composer of many of the psalms. The youthful David also helped Saul by famously defeating the Philistine champion Goliath in individual combat (17:32-51). This victory anticipated David’s role as a victorious military leader.<\/p>\n<p>Although David was loyal, Saul grew deeply suspicious of him, and David had to flee. He was able to escape with help from Saul’s own children, Jonathan and Michal. David led a virtual kingdom in exile. He had a standing army of six hundred men. The prophet Gad and the priest Abiathar were also with him, providing direction and guidance from the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>God’s long-suffering patience finally ran out with Saul, and Saul died on the battlefield. Yet it was still not easy for David to establish his rule over all Israel. The tribe of Judah immediately proclaimed him its king, but at first the northern tribes chose Ishbosheth, a son of Saul, to be their leader. Ishbosheth was not a powerful or good leader; he only stayed in power because of the protection of his father’s military leader, Abner. However, Ishbosheth foolishly insulted Abner, so the general helped turn the kingdom over to David.<\/p>\n<p>As king over a united Israel, David proceeded to solidify the kingdom. He and his men captured Jerusalem from the Jebusites and made this central city his capital. He also expelled the remaining Philistines from the land. He then brought the Ark of the Covenant into Jerusalem. David wanted to build a permanent temple to God in Jerusalem to replace the Tabernacle. God denied this wish, but he showed his love for David by entering into a covenant with him that established his descendants as a dynasty (2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s life soon took a turn for the worse, however (see 2 Sam 11–12). At a time when he probably should have been on the battlefield with his army, he was lounging around on the palace roof. He saw a beautiful woman named Bathsheba taking a bath. He wanted her, so, like a Near Eastern despot, he took her. She became pregnant, and his attempt to cover up his adultery failed. In a desperate attempt to keep things secret, he had her husband, Uriah, killed. But not even a great king like David can keep secrets from God, and God sent his prophet Nathan to confront David. David repented (see Pss 32, 51), but the consequences of his actions plagued his family and the rest of his reign.<\/p>\n<p>From that point on, David’s family fell apart. David’s son Amnon raped his half sister Tamar (2 Sam 13:1-14). Her brother Absalom then murdered Amnon (2 Sam 13:20-29). Absalom later created a civil war as he tried to steal the throne from his father (2 Sam 15–18). Another son, Adonijah, tried to take the throne from David by having himself proclaimed king while his father was still alive (1 Kgs 1:5-10). But David was able to muster enough strength to ensure that Solomon would succeed him (1 Kgs 1:28-40). David died, Solomon was proclaimed king, and David’s long dynasty began (as promised in 2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s successors seldom measured up. Only rarely did his descendants lead the nation to worship God faithfully; the united monarchy did not even outlive Solomon. In the centuries that followed, the descendants of David ruled only Judah in the south. Eventually, the kingdom of Judah was destroyed. Never again did a descendant of David reign as king in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>What, then, of the promise to David that “your throne will be secure forever” (2 Sam 7:16)? The New Testament points to Jesus. He was the descendant of David, and God proclaimed him the Christ, or Messiah—the anointed king (see Matt 1:1; 9:27; 12:23; Mark 10:47-48; 11:10; 12:35-37; Luke 18:38-39; 20:41-44; John 7:42; Rev 5:5; 22:16). The life and rule of David foreshadows the messianic reign of Jesus Christ, which will last forever (see Luke 1:32-33; Rev 11:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ruth 4:13-22; 1 Sam 16:1–17:58; 18:1–27:12; 29:1–30:31; 2 Sam 1:1–24:25; 1 Kgs 1:1–2:12; 1 Chr 11:1–29:30; Pss 1–32, 34–41, 51–71, 86, 91–110, 122, 124, 131, 133, 138–145; Matt 1:1; 9:27; 22:41-46; Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44; John 7:40-44; Acts 2:22-37; 13:20-43; Rom 1:3; Rev 22:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>David<\/h3>\n<p>David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance.<\/p>\n<p>David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use David to complete the conquest of the land.<\/p>\n<p>As a youth, David was a simple shepherd, watching his father’s sheep (1 Sam 16:11; 17:14-15). His life took an unexpected turn when the prophet Samuel came to Jesse and anointed David as the next king of Israel. However, David’s kingship was not initiated by a coup or an assassination. In fact, David became a faithful servant to King Saul. David first entered Saul’s service as a musician, playing songs that soothed Saul’s tormented soul (16:14-23). This service anticipated David’s role as the composer of many of the psalms. The youthful David also helped Saul by famously defeating the Philistine champion Goliath in individual combat (17:32-51). This victory anticipated David’s role as a victorious military leader.<\/p>\n<p>Although David was loyal, Saul grew deeply suspicious of him, and David had to flee. He was able to escape with help from Saul’s own children, Jonathan and Michal. David led a virtual kingdom in exile. He had a standing army of six hundred men. The prophet Gad and the priest Abiathar were also with him, providing direction and guidance from the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>God’s long-suffering patience finally ran out with Saul, and Saul died on the battlefield. Yet it was still not easy for David to establish his rule over all Israel. The tribe of Judah immediately proclaimed him its king, but at first the northern tribes chose Ishbosheth, a son of Saul, to be their leader. Ishbosheth was not a powerful or good leader; he only stayed in power because of the protection of his father’s military leader, Abner. However, Ishbosheth foolishly insulted Abner, so the general helped turn the kingdom over to David.<\/p>\n<p>As king over a united Israel, David proceeded to solidify the kingdom. He and his men captured Jerusalem from the Jebusites and made this central city his capital. He also expelled the remaining Philistines from the land. He then brought the Ark of the Covenant into Jerusalem. David wanted to build a permanent temple to God in Jerusalem to replace the Tabernacle. God denied this wish, but he showed his love for David by entering into a covenant with him that established his descendants as a dynasty (2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s life soon took a turn for the worse, however (see 2 Sam 11–12). At a time when he probably should have been on the battlefield with his army, he was lounging around on the palace roof. He saw a beautiful woman named Bathsheba taking a bath. He wanted her, so, like a Near Eastern despot, he took her. She became pregnant, and his attempt to cover up his adultery failed. In a desperate attempt to keep things secret, he had her husband, Uriah, killed. But not even a great king like David can keep secrets from God, and God sent his prophet Nathan to confront David. David repented (see Pss 32, 51), but the consequences of his actions plagued his family and the rest of his reign.<\/p>\n<p>From that point on, David’s family fell apart. David’s son Amnon raped his half sister Tamar (2 Sam 13:1-14). Her brother Absalom then murdered Amnon (2 Sam 13:20-29). Absalom later created a civil war as he tried to steal the throne from his father (2 Sam 15–18). Another son, Adonijah, tried to take the throne from David by having himself proclaimed king while his father was still alive (1 Kgs 1:5-10). But David was able to muster enough strength to ensure that Solomon would succeed him (1 Kgs 1:28-40). David died, Solomon was proclaimed king, and David’s long dynasty began (as promised in 2 Sam 7).<\/p>\n<p>David’s successors seldom measured up. Only rarely did his descendants lead the nation to worship God faithfully; the united monarchy did not even outlive Solomon. In the centuries that followed, the descendants of David ruled only Judah in the south. Eventually, the kingdom of Judah was destroyed. Never again did a descendant of David reign as king in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>What, then, of the promise to David that “your throne will be secure forever” (2 Sam 7:16)? The New Testament points to Jesus. He was the descendant of David, and God proclaimed him the Christ, or Messiah—the anointed king (see Matt 1:1; 9:27; 12:23; Mark 10:47-48; 11:10; 12:35-37; Luke 18:38-39; 20:41-44; John 7:42; Rev 5:5; 22:16). The life and rule of David foreshadows the messianic reign of Jesus Christ, which will last forever (see Luke 1:32-33; Rev 11:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ruth 4:13-22; 1 Sam 16:1–17:58; 18:1–27:12; 29:1–30:31; 2 Sam 1:1–24:25; 1 Kgs 1:1–2:12; 1 Chr 11:1–29:30; Pss 1–32, 34–41, 51–71, 86, 91–110, 122, 124, 131, 133, 138–145; Matt 1:1; 9:27; 22:41-46; Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44; John 7:40-44; Acts 2:22-37; 13:20-43; Rom 1:3; Rev 22:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"David David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance. David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use Dav...","summary_en":"David David is one of the monumental figures of biblical history. His reign was a high point in God’s plan for Israel, and it had great and lasting significance. David was born in Bethlehem as Jesse’s youngest son; his lineage is traced back to Judah (Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 2:3-15; Matt 1:3-6; Luke 3:31-33). At the time of his birth, Jerusalem was occupied by the Jebusites, and large parts of the Promised Land were still occupied by foreign people, most notably the Philistines. God would use Dav...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":1324,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Amminadab","title_en":"Amminadab","content_ro":"<h3>AMMINADAB<\/h3>\n<li>1. Father of Elisheba, who was Aaron’s wife (Ex 6:23). Amminadab was also the father of Nahshon, Judah’s tribal leader in the wilderness (Nm 1:7; 2:3; 7:12, 17; 10:14; 1 Chr 2:10). Amminadab is listed in the genealogy of David (Ru 4:18-22) and later in the genealogy of Jesus Christ (Mt 1:4; Lk 3:33). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>\n<li>2. Alternate name for Izhar, one of Kohath’s sons (1 Chr 6:22). <em>See<\/em> Izhar #1.<\/li>\n<li>3. Levite contemporary of King David who helped bring the ark of the Lord to Jerusalem (1 Chr 15:1-4, 10-11).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>AMMINADAB<\/h3>\n<li>1. Father of Elisheba, who was Aaron’s wife (Ex 6:23). Amminadab was also the father of Nahshon, Judah’s tribal leader in the wilderness (Nm 1:7; 2:3; 7:12, 17; 10:14; 1 Chr 2:10). Amminadab is listed in the genealogy of David (Ru 4:18-22) and later in the genealogy of Jesus Christ (Mt 1:4; Lk 3:33). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>\n<li>2. Alternate name for Izhar, one of Kohath’s sons (1 Chr 6:22). <em>See<\/em> Izhar #1.<\/li>\n<li>3. Levite contemporary of King David who helped bring the ark of the Lord to Jerusalem (1 Chr 15:1-4, 10-11).<\/li>","summary_ro":"AMMINADAB 1. Father of Elisheba, who was Aaron’s wife (Ex 6:23). Amminadab was also the father of Nahshon, Judah’s tribal leader in the wilderness (Nm 1:7; 2:3; 7:12, 17; 10:14; 1 Chr 2:10). Amminadab is listed in the genealogy of David (Ru 4:18-22) and later in the genealogy of Jesus Christ (Mt 1:4; Lk 3:33). See Genealogy of Jesus Christ. 2. Alternate name for Izhar, one of Kohath’s sons (1 Chr 6:22). See Izhar #1. 3. Levite contemporary of King David who helped bring the ark of the Lord to...","summary_en":"AMMINADAB 1. Father of Elisheba, who was Aaron’s wife (Ex 6:23). Amminadab was also the father of Nahshon, Judah’s tribal leader in the wilderness (Nm 1:7; 2:3; 7:12, 17; 10:14; 1 Chr 2:10). Amminadab is listed in the genealogy of David (Ru 4:18-22) and later in the genealogy of Jesus Christ (Mt 1:4; Lk 3:33). See Genealogy of Jesus Christ. 2. Alternate name for Izhar, one of Kohath’s sons (1 Chr 6:22). See Izhar #1. 3. Levite contemporary of King David who helped bring the ark of the Lord to...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":5345,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Boaz (Person)","title_en":"Boaz (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>BOAZ (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>Salmon’s son of Judah’s tribe (Ru 4:18-22). Boaz lived in Bethlehem in the days of the judges and married Ruth, a Moabite woman. Boaz was an ancestor of Christ (Mt 1:5; Lk 3:32) and a wealthy relative by marriage of Ruth’s mother-in-law, Naomi. Ruth attracted the attention of Boaz when she was gleaning in one of his fields (Ru 2). His kindness to Ruth convinced Naomi that Boaz might be willing to redeem some land her husband had owned and at the same time accept the levirate marriage with Ruth that such a transaction required.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ruth, Book of; Marriage, Marriage Customs; Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BOAZ (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>Salmon’s son of Judah’s tribe (Ru 4:18-22). Boaz lived in Bethlehem in the days of the judges and married Ruth, a Moabite woman. Boaz was an ancestor of Christ (Mt 1:5; Lk 3:32) and a wealthy relative by marriage of Ruth’s mother-in-law, Naomi. Ruth attracted the attention of Boaz when she was gleaning in one of his fields (Ru 2). His kindness to Ruth convinced Naomi that Boaz might be willing to redeem some land her husband had owned and at the same time accept the levirate marriage with Ruth that such a transaction required.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ruth, Book of; Marriage, Marriage Customs; Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BOAZ (Person) Salmon’s son of Judah’s tribe (Ru 4:18-22). Boaz lived in Bethlehem in the days of the judges and married Ruth, a Moabite woman. Boaz was an ancestor of Christ (Mt 1:5; Lk 3:32) and a wealthy relative by marriage of Ruth’s mother-in-law, Naomi. Ruth attracted the attention of Boaz when she was gleaning in one of his fields (Ru 2). His kindness to Ruth convinced Naomi that Boaz might be willing to redeem some land her husband had owned and at the same time accept the levirate mar...","summary_en":"BOAZ (Person) Salmon’s son of Judah’s tribe (Ru 4:18-22). Boaz lived in Bethlehem in the days of the judges and married Ruth, a Moabite woman. Boaz was an ancestor of Christ (Mt 1:5; Lk 3:32) and a wealthy relative by marriage of Ruth’s mother-in-law, Naomi. Ruth attracted the attention of Boaz when she was gleaning in one of his fields (Ru 2). His kindness to Ruth convinced Naomi that Boaz might be willing to redeem some land her husband had owned and at the same time accept the levirate mar...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":8700,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"David","title_en":"David","content_ro":"<h3>DAVID<\/h3>\n<p>Israel’s most important king. David’s kingdom represented the epitome of Israel’s power and influence during the nation’s OT history.<\/p>\n<p>The two books in the OT devoted to David’s reign are 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles. His earlier years are recorded in 1 Samuel, beginning at chapter 16. Almost half of the biblical psalms are ascribed to David. His importance extends into the NT, where he is identified as an ancestor of Jesus Christ and forerunner of the messianic king.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Early Years<\/p>\n<p>• Preparation for Kingship<\/p>\n<p>• David as King<\/p>\n<p>David’s Lasting Influence<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EarlyYears\">Early Years<\/p>\n<h5>Family<\/h5>\n<p>David was the youngest son in Jesse’s family, part of Judah’s tribe. The family lived in Bethlehem, about six miles (10 kilometers) south of Jerusalem. His great-grandmother was Ruth, from the land of Moab (Ru 4:18-22). Genealogies in both the OT and the NT trace David’s lineage back to Judah, son of the patriarch Jacob (1 Chr 2:3-15; Mt 1:3-6; Lk 3:31-33).<\/p>\n<h5>Training and Talents<\/h5>\n<p>Little is known about David’s early life. As a boy, he took care of his father’s sheep, risking his life to kill attacking bears and lions. Later, David publicly acknowledged God’s help and strength in protecting the flocks under his care (1 Sm 17:34-37).<\/p>\n<p>David was an accomplished musician. He had developed his ability as a harpist so well that, when a musician was needed at the royal court of King Saul, someone immediately recommended David.<\/p>\n<p>In Jesse’s family, David was regarded as unimportant. When the nationally known prophet Samuel visited Jesse’s home, all the older sons were on hand to meet him; David was tending the sheep. Samuel had been instructed by God to anoint a king from Jesse’s family, not knowing beforehand which son to anoint. Sensing divine restraint as seven brothers passed before him, he made further inquiry. When he learned that Jesse had one other son, David was immediately summoned. David was anointed by Samuel and endowed with the Spirit of the Lord (1 Sm 16:1-13). Whatever Jesse and his family understood by that anointing, it seems to have made no immediate change in David’s pattern of living. He continued to tend the sheep.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparationforKingship\">Preparation for Kingship<\/p>\n<p>During his youth, David was willing to serve others, even though he had been anointed king. It was his willingness to take supplies to three of his older brothers in the army that gave him his opportunity for national fame.<\/p>\n<p>As a young man, David was also sensitive toward God. While greeting his brothers on the battlefield, he was disturbed by the Philistine Goliath’s defiance of God’s armies. Although rebuked by his brothers, David accepted the challenge to take on Goliath. He had a reasonable confidence that God, who had helped him encounter a lion and a bear, would aid him against a champion warrior. So, with faith in God and using his ability to sling stones, David killed Goliath (1 Sm 17:12-58).<\/p>\n<h5>National Fame<\/h5>\n<p>Killing Goliath made David a hero to the nation of Israel. It also brought him into close relationship with the royal family of Saul. But success and national acclaim brought on the jealousy of Saul and ultimately resulted in David’s expulsion from the land of Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Royal Court<\/h5>\n<p>Saul promised his oldest daughter, Merab, to David in marriage, but then Saul went back on the promise and offered David another daughter, Michal. The dowry of trophies from dead Philistines demanded by Saul was designed to bring about David’s death at Philistine hands. But again David was victorious. Women sang praises of his exploits, intensifying Saul’s jealousy and further endangering David’s life (1 Sm 18:6-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the meantime, David and Saul’s son Jonathan developed a deep friendship. When they made a covenant, Jonathan gave David his choicest military equipment (sword, bow, and belt). Although Saul tried to turn Jonathan against David, the friendship deepened. Because Saul was trying to kill him, David had to flee from the court and live as a fugitive.<\/p>\n<p>After Jonathan had warned David of Saul’s continuing designs on his life, David went to Ramah to see the prophet Samuel. Together they went to Naioth, near Ramah. After sending several groups of men after David, Saul finally went with them himself. All his attempts to seize David were thwarted by the Spirit of God, who caused Saul and his men to prophesy all night in religious fervor (1 Sm 19).<\/p>\n<p>Conferring again with Jonathan, David realized that Saul’s jealousy had developed into hatred. Jonathan, aware that David would be the future king of Israel, requested assurance that his descendants would receive protection under David’s rule (1 Sm 20).<\/p>\n<h5>Life as a Fugitive<\/h5>\n<p>Fleeing from Saul, David stopped at Nob. By deceiving Ahimelech, who was officiating as priest there, David obtained food supplies and Goliath’s sword (kept as a trophy). An Edomite named Doeg, chief of Saul’s herdsmen, saw what happened at Nob. David continued his flight, taking refuge temporarily in Gath with King Achish (1 Sm 21), then finding shelter in the cave of Adullam, located 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) southwest of Bethlehem. There his relatives and about 400 fighting men joined him. He went to Mizpeh in Moab, appealing to the Moabite king for protection, especially for his parents. When the prophet Gad warned him not to stay there, David moved back to Judah to the Hereth woods (1 Sm 22:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>David’s freedom of movement enraged Saul, who charged his own people with conspiracy. When Doeg reported what he had witnessed at Nob, Saul executed Ahimelech and 84 other priests, then massacred all of Nob’s inhabitants. One priest named Abiathar escaped to report Saul’s atrocities to David, who assured him of protection (1 Sm 22:6-23).<\/p>\n<p>The Philistines were always ready to take advantage of any weakness in Israel. David’s reprisal after a Philistine raid on Keilah, 12 miles (19.3 kilometers) southwest of Bethlehem, gave Saul an opportunity to attack David, who escaped to the wilderness of Ziph, a desert area near Hebron. David and Jonathan met for the last time in that wilderness. Pursued by Saul’s army, David fled still farther south. He was almost encircled in uninhabited country near Maon when Saul had to march his army off to respond to a Philistine attack (1 Sm 23).<\/p>\n<p>At his next place of refuge, En-gedi, on the western shore of the Dead Sea, David was attacked by Saul with 3,000 soldiers. David had an opportunity to kill Saul but refused to harm the “Lord’s anointed” king of Israel. Learning of David’s loyalty, Saul confessed his sin in seeking David’s life (1 Sm 24).<\/p>\n<p>During the years they roamed the wilderness in the Maon\/Ziph\/En-gedi area, David’s band provided protection for Nabal, a rich man living in Maon with large flocks of sheep at Carmel. In exchange for that protection, David proposed that Nabal share some of his wealth. Nabal’s scorn angered David, but Nabal’s wife, Abigail, appealed to David not to take revenge. When Abigail told Nabal of his narrow escape, he was evidently so shocked that he had a heart seizure. He died ten days later, and Abigail later became David’s wife (1 Sm 25).<\/p>\n<p>Once more Saul came with an army of 3,000 men into the Ziph Desert to find David, and David again passed up an opportunity to harm the king. Finally realizing the folly of seeking David’s life, Saul abandoned pursuit (1 Sm 26).<\/p>\n<h5>Refuge in Philistia<\/h5>\n<p>David continued to feel unsafe in Saul’s kingdom. Returning to Gath in Philistine country, he was welcomed by King Achish. His followers were allotted the city of Ziklag, where they lived for about 16 months, attracting new recruits from Judah and the rest of Israel (1 Sm 27; 1 Chr 12:19-22).<\/p>\n<p>The Philistine army, marching up to the Megiddo Valley to fight Saul’s army, was uneasy with David’s guerrillas in their rear column, so the commanders put pressure on Achish to dismiss David. When he returned to Ziklag, David found that the city had just been raided by the Amalekites. He pursued the enemy, rescued his people and goods, and divided the spoils with those who had remained behind to guard the supplies (1 Sm 29–30). Meanwhile, the Philistines routed the Israelites at Mt Gilboa, killing Jonathan and two of Saul’s other sons in a fierce battle. Saul, badly wounded, killed himself with his own sword (ch 31).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DavidasKing\">David as King<\/p>\n<p>David ruled over Israel for about 40 years, although the accounts of his reign do not contain enough information for an exact chronology. He began his rule at Hebron and reigned over Judah’s territory for seven or eight years. With the death of Saul’s successor, Ishbosheth, David was recognized as king by all the tribes and made Jerusalem his capital. During the next decade, he unified Israel through military and economic expansion. Then came approximately 10 years of disruption in the royal family. The last years of David’s reign seem to have been devoted to plans for the Jerusalem temple, which was built in the reign of his son Solomon.<\/p>\n<h5>The Years in Hebron<\/h5>\n<p>David was subjected to an unusually rugged period of training for his kingship. Serving under Saul, he gained experience in military exploits against the Philistines. Then, during his fugitive wanderings in the desert area of southern Judah, he ingratiated himself with the landholders and sheep raisers by giving them protection. Being recognized as an outlaw of Israel even enabled him to negotiate diplomatic relations with Moab and Philistia.<\/p>\n<p>David was in Philistine country when news came to him that both Saul and Jonathan had been slain. In a beautiful elegy he paid tribute to his friend Jonathan as well as to King Saul (2 Sm 1).<\/p>\n<p>Sure of God’s guidance, David returned to his home, where the leaders of Judah anointed him king at Hebron. He sent a message of commendation to the men of Jabesh for providing a respectable burial for King Saul, probably also bidding for their support.<\/p>\n<p>Confusion probably swept through Israel when Saul was killed, because the Philistines occupied much of the land. Various leaders gathered whatever fighting men they could find, as old tribal loyalties reasserted themselves. David had most of Judah’s tribe firmly behind him.<\/p>\n<p>A kind of civil war broke out between the followers of David and those of Saul, with David gaining the allegiance of more and more people. Saul’s general, Abner, eventually negotiated peace with David, who requested the restoration of Michal as his wife, indicating that he held no animosity toward Saul’s dynasty. With the consent of Saul’s son Ishbosheth, whom Abner had enthroned as king, Abner went to Hebron and pledged Israel’s support for David. But Abner was killed by Joab, one of David’s captains, in a family vendetta, and soon afterward Ishbosheth was assassinated. David publicly mourned Abner’s death and had Ishbosheth’s two murderers executed. Thus, when Saul’s dynasty ended, David was seen by the people not so much as a challenger but as a logical successor. Hence, he was recognized as king by all Israel (2 Sm 2–4).<\/p>\n<h5>Consolidation in Jerusalem<\/h5>\n<p>When the Israelites turned to David as king, the Philistines became alarmed and attacked (2 Sm 5; 1 Chr 14:8-17). David was strong enough to defeat them and thus unify the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>In search of a more central location for his capital, David turned toward the city of Jerusalem, a Jebusite stronghold. Joab responded to his challenge to conquer the city and was rewarded by being made general of David’s army. Jerusalem became known as the “city of David” (1 Chr 11:4-9).<\/p>\n<p>In the same way that he had organized his earliest followers into an effective guerrilla band (1 Chr 11:1–12:22) at Hebron, David began organizing the whole nation (12:23-40). Once established in Jerusalem, he quickly gained recognition from the Phoenicians, contracting for their artisans to build him a magnificent palace in the new capital (14:1-2). He also made sure that Jerusalem would become Israel’s religious center (2 Sm 6; 1 Chr 13–16). His abortive attempt to move the ark of the covenant by oxcart (cf. Nm 4) reminded the powerful king that he still had to do things God’s way to be successful.<\/p>\n<p>With Jerusalem well established as the nation’s capital, David intended to build God a temple. He shared his plan with the prophet Nathan, whose immediate response was positive. That night, however, God sent a message via Nathan that David should not build the temple. David’s throne would be established eternally, the prophet said, and unlike Saul, King David would have a son to succeed him and perpetuate the kingdom; that son would build the temple (2 Sm 7; 1 Chr 17).<\/p>\n<h5>Prosperity and Supremacy<\/h5>\n<p>Little is recorded about the expansion of David’s rule from the tribal area of Judah to a vast empire stretching from the Nile River of Egypt to regions of the Tigris-Euphrates valley. Nothing in secular history negates the biblical perspective that David had the most powerful kingdom in the heart of that “Fertile Crescent” about 1000 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>It is likely that skirmishes with the Philistines to the west were frequent until they finally became subservient to David and paid him tribute. In Saul’s day the Philistines had enjoyed a monopoly on the use of iron (1 Sm 13:19-21). The fact that David freely used iron near the end of his reign (1 Chr 22:3) hints at profound economic changes in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>David’s kingdom expanded southward as he built military garrisons in Edomite territory. Beyond Edom, he controlled the Moabites and Amalekites, who paid him tribute in silver and gold. To the northeast, Israelite domination was extended over the Ammonites and the Arameans, whose capital was Damascus. David’s treatment of both friends and enemies seemed to contribute to the strength of his kingdom (2 Sm 8–10). Although he was a brilliant military strategist who used all the means and resources available to bring Israel success, David was humble enough to glorify God (2 Sm 22; see Ps 18).<\/p>\n<h5>Sin in the Royal Family<\/h5>\n<p>A lengthy section of the book of 2 Samuel (chs 11–20) gives a remarkably frank account of sin, crime, and rebellion in David’s family. The king’s own imperfections are clearly portrayed; the king of Israel himself could not escape God’s judgement when he did wrong.<\/p>\n<p>Although polygamy was then a Near Eastern status symbol, it was forbidden for a king of Israel (Dt 17:17). David practiced polygamy, however; some of his marriages undoubtedly had political implications (such as his marriages to Saul’s daughter Michal and to princess Maacah of Geshur). Flagrant sins of incest, murder, and rebellion in his family brought David much suffering and almost cost him the throne.<\/p>\n<p>David’s sin of adultery with Bathsheba, committed at the height of his military success and territorial expansion, led him further into evil: he planned a strategy to have Bathsheba’s husband, Uriah, killed on the front line of battle. David seems to have excluded God from consideration in that segment of his personal life. Yet when the prophet Nathan confronted the king with his sins, David acknowledged his guilt. He confessed his sin and pleaded with God for forgiveness (as in Pss 32 and 51). God forgave him, but for nearly ten years David endured the consequences of his lack of self-restraint and his failure to exercise discipline in his family. Although unsurpassed in military and diplomatic strategy, David lacked strength of character in his domestic affairs. Evil fermented in his own house; the father’s self-indulgence was soon reflected in Amnon’s crime of incest, followed by Absalom’s murder of his brother.<\/p>\n<p>Having incurred his father’s disfavor, Absalom took refuge in Geshur with his mother’s people for three years. Joab, David’s general, was eventually able to reconcile David with his alienated son. Absalom, however, having taken advantage of his position in the royal family to gain a following, went to Hebron, staged a surprise rebellion, and proclaimed himself king throughout Israel. His strong following posed such a threat that David fled from Jerusalem. David, still a master strategist, gained time through a ruse to organize his forces and put down his son’s rebellion. Absalom was killed while trying to flee; his death plunged David into grief.<\/p>\n<p>On his return to Jerusalem, David had to work at undoing the damage caused by Absalom’s revolt. His own tribe of Judah, for example, had supported Absalom. Another rebellion, fomented by Sheba of Benjamin’s tribe, had to be suppressed by Joab before the nation could settle down.<\/p>\n<h5>David’s Last Years<\/h5>\n<p>Although David was not permitted to build the temple in Jerusalem, he made extensive preparations for that project during the last years of his reign. He stockpiled materials and organized the kingdom for efficient use of domestic and foreign labor. He also outlined details for religious worship in the new structure (1 Chr 21–29).<\/p>\n<p>The military and civic organization developed by David was probably patterned after Egyptian practice. The army, rigidly controlled by officers of proven loyalty to the king, included mercenaries. The king also appointed trusted supervisors over farms, livestock, and orchards in various parts of his empire (1 Chr 27:25-31).<\/p>\n<p>David took, or at least began, a census of Israel (2 Sm 24; 1 Chr 21). The incompleteness of the accounts leaves unanswered such questions as the reason for God’s punishment. The king overruled Joab’s objection and insisted that the census be taken. Since David later seemed keenly aware that he had sinned in taking the census, it may be that he was motivated by pride to ascertain his exact military strength (approx. 1.5 million men). God may also have been judging the people for their support of the rebellions of Absalom and Sheba.<\/p>\n<p>Through the prophet Gad, David was given a choice of punishments for his sin. He chose a three-day pestilence. As David and the elders repented, they saw an angel on the threshing floor of the Jebusite Ornan (Araunah). David offered sacrifice there and prayed for his people. Later he purchased the threshing floor, located just outside the city of Jerusalem, concluding that it should be the site for the temple to be built by his son Solomon (1 Chr 21:28–22:1).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DavidsLastingInfluence\">David’s Lasting Influence<\/p>\n<h5>The Writer of Psalms<\/h5>\n<p>The OT book of Psalms became one of the most popular books in ancient Israel, and has remained so among countless millions of people throughout the centuries. These words of praise prepared by David were intended for use in the temple worship (2 Chr 29:30). The 73 psalms ascribed to David generally grew out of his own relationship to God and to other persons.<\/p>\n\n<p>David probably compiled Book I of the book of Psalms (1–41) and Book IV (90–106), since most of those psalms were written by David himself. Other psalms of his (Pss 51–71) are in Book II (42–72), which was probably compiled by Solomon. As those psalms were used for worship in later generations, various people added others until the time of Ezra.<\/p>\n<p>David’s psalms provided much of the poetry that was set to music for Israel’s worship. His organization of the priests and Levites and his provision of instruments for worship (2 Chr 7:6; 8:14) set the pattern for generations to come in the religious life of Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>David in the Writings of the Prophets<\/h5>\n<p>David, recognized as the greatest Israelite king, is often mentioned as a standard of comparison in the writings of the OT prophets. Isaiah (as in Is 7:2, 13; 22:22) and Jeremiah often referred to their contemporary kings as belonging to the “house” or “throne” of David. Contrasting David with some of his descendants who did not honor God, both Isaiah and Jeremiah predicted a messianic ruler who would establish justice and righteousness on the throne of David forever (Is 9:7; Jer 33:15). When Isaiah described the coming ruler, he identified him as being from the lineage of Jesse, David’s father (Is 11:1-10). Predicting a period of universal peace, Isaiah saw the capital in “Zion,” identified with the city of David (2:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel promised the restoration of David as king in an eschatological and messianic sense (Ez 37:24-25), and of “my servant David” as Israel’s shepherd (34:23). Hosea likewise identified the future ruler as King David (Hos 3:5). Amos assured the people that God would restore the “tabernacle” of David (Am 9:11) so that they could again dwell in safety. Zechariah referred five times to the “house of David” (in Zec 12–13, <span>rsv<\/span>), encouraging the hope of a restoration of David’s glorious dynasty. The concept of the eternal throne promised to David during his reign was delineated in the message of the prophets even while they were announcing judgments to come on the rulers and people of their time.<\/p>\n<h5>David in the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>David is frequently mentioned by the Gospel writers, who established Jesus’ identity as the “son of David.” The covenant God made with David was that an eternal king would come from David’s family (Mt 1:1; 9:27; 12:23; Mk 10:48; 12:35; Lk 18:38-39; 20:41). According to Mark 11:10 and John 7:42, the Jews of Jesus’ day expected the Messiah (Christ) to be a descendant of David. While stating that Jesus came from the lineage of David, the Gospels also clearly teach that Jesus was the Son of God (Mt 22:41-45; Mk 12:35-37; Lk 20:41-44).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Acts, David is recognized as the recipient of God’s promises that were fulfilled in Jesus Christ. David is also seen as a prophet whom the Holy Spirit inspired to write the psalms (Acts 1:16; 2:22-36; 4:25; 13:26-39).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Revelation, Jesus is designated as having the “key of David” (Rv 3:7), and as being “the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David” (5:5). Jesus is quoted as asserting that “I am the root and the offspring of David, the bright morning star” (22:16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Israel, History of; King; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DAVID<\/h3>\n<p>Israel’s most important king. David’s kingdom represented the epitome of Israel’s power and influence during the nation’s OT history.<\/p>\n<p>The two books in the OT devoted to David’s reign are 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles. His earlier years are recorded in 1 Samuel, beginning at chapter 16. Almost half of the biblical psalms are ascribed to David. His importance extends into the NT, where he is identified as an ancestor of Jesus Christ and forerunner of the messianic king.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Early Years<\/p>\n<p>• Preparation for Kingship<\/p>\n<p>• David as King<\/p>\n<p>David’s Lasting Influence<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EarlyYears\">Early Years<\/p>\n<h5>Family<\/h5>\n<p>David was the youngest son in Jesse’s family, part of Judah’s tribe. The family lived in Bethlehem, about six miles (10 kilometers) south of Jerusalem. His great-grandmother was Ruth, from the land of Moab (Ru 4:18-22). Genealogies in both the OT and the NT trace David’s lineage back to Judah, son of the patriarch Jacob (1 Chr 2:3-15; Mt 1:3-6; Lk 3:31-33).<\/p>\n<h5>Training and Talents<\/h5>\n<p>Little is known about David’s early life. As a boy, he took care of his father’s sheep, risking his life to kill attacking bears and lions. Later, David publicly acknowledged God’s help and strength in protecting the flocks under his care (1 Sm 17:34-37).<\/p>\n<p>David was an accomplished musician. He had developed his ability as a harpist so well that, when a musician was needed at the royal court of King Saul, someone immediately recommended David.<\/p>\n<p>In Jesse’s family, David was regarded as unimportant. When the nationally known prophet Samuel visited Jesse’s home, all the older sons were on hand to meet him; David was tending the sheep. Samuel had been instructed by God to anoint a king from Jesse’s family, not knowing beforehand which son to anoint. Sensing divine restraint as seven brothers passed before him, he made further inquiry. When he learned that Jesse had one other son, David was immediately summoned. David was anointed by Samuel and endowed with the Spirit of the Lord (1 Sm 16:1-13). Whatever Jesse and his family understood by that anointing, it seems to have made no immediate change in David’s pattern of living. He continued to tend the sheep.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparationforKingship\">Preparation for Kingship<\/p>\n<p>During his youth, David was willing to serve others, even though he had been anointed king. It was his willingness to take supplies to three of his older brothers in the army that gave him his opportunity for national fame.<\/p>\n<p>As a young man, David was also sensitive toward God. While greeting his brothers on the battlefield, he was disturbed by the Philistine Goliath’s defiance of God’s armies. Although rebuked by his brothers, David accepted the challenge to take on Goliath. He had a reasonable confidence that God, who had helped him encounter a lion and a bear, would aid him against a champion warrior. So, with faith in God and using his ability to sling stones, David killed Goliath (1 Sm 17:12-58).<\/p>\n<h5>National Fame<\/h5>\n<p>Killing Goliath made David a hero to the nation of Israel. It also brought him into close relationship with the royal family of Saul. But success and national acclaim brought on the jealousy of Saul and ultimately resulted in David’s expulsion from the land of Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Royal Court<\/h5>\n<p>Saul promised his oldest daughter, Merab, to David in marriage, but then Saul went back on the promise and offered David another daughter, Michal. The dowry of trophies from dead Philistines demanded by Saul was designed to bring about David’s death at Philistine hands. But again David was victorious. Women sang praises of his exploits, intensifying Saul’s jealousy and further endangering David’s life (1 Sm 18:6-30).<\/p>\n<p>In the meantime, David and Saul’s son Jonathan developed a deep friendship. When they made a covenant, Jonathan gave David his choicest military equipment (sword, bow, and belt). Although Saul tried to turn Jonathan against David, the friendship deepened. Because Saul was trying to kill him, David had to flee from the court and live as a fugitive.<\/p>\n<p>After Jonathan had warned David of Saul’s continuing designs on his life, David went to Ramah to see the prophet Samuel. Together they went to Naioth, near Ramah. After sending several groups of men after David, Saul finally went with them himself. All his attempts to seize David were thwarted by the Spirit of God, who caused Saul and his men to prophesy all night in religious fervor (1 Sm 19).<\/p>\n<p>Conferring again with Jonathan, David realized that Saul’s jealousy had developed into hatred. Jonathan, aware that David would be the future king of Israel, requested assurance that his descendants would receive protection under David’s rule (1 Sm 20).<\/p>\n<h5>Life as a Fugitive<\/h5>\n<p>Fleeing from Saul, David stopped at Nob. By deceiving Ahimelech, who was officiating as priest there, David obtained food supplies and Goliath’s sword (kept as a trophy). An Edomite named Doeg, chief of Saul’s herdsmen, saw what happened at Nob. David continued his flight, taking refuge temporarily in Gath with King Achish (1 Sm 21), then finding shelter in the cave of Adullam, located 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) southwest of Bethlehem. There his relatives and about 400 fighting men joined him. He went to Mizpeh in Moab, appealing to the Moabite king for protection, especially for his parents. When the prophet Gad warned him not to stay there, David moved back to Judah to the Hereth woods (1 Sm 22:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>David’s freedom of movement enraged Saul, who charged his own people with conspiracy. When Doeg reported what he had witnessed at Nob, Saul executed Ahimelech and 84 other priests, then massacred all of Nob’s inhabitants. One priest named Abiathar escaped to report Saul’s atrocities to David, who assured him of protection (1 Sm 22:6-23).<\/p>\n<p>The Philistines were always ready to take advantage of any weakness in Israel. David’s reprisal after a Philistine raid on Keilah, 12 miles (19.3 kilometers) southwest of Bethlehem, gave Saul an opportunity to attack David, who escaped to the wilderness of Ziph, a desert area near Hebron. David and Jonathan met for the last time in that wilderness. Pursued by Saul’s army, David fled still farther south. He was almost encircled in uninhabited country near Maon when Saul had to march his army off to respond to a Philistine attack (1 Sm 23).<\/p>\n<p>At his next place of refuge, En-gedi, on the western shore of the Dead Sea, David was attacked by Saul with 3,000 soldiers. David had an opportunity to kill Saul but refused to harm the “Lord’s anointed” king of Israel. Learning of David’s loyalty, Saul confessed his sin in seeking David’s life (1 Sm 24).<\/p>\n<p>During the years they roamed the wilderness in the Maon\/Ziph\/En-gedi area, David’s band provided protection for Nabal, a rich man living in Maon with large flocks of sheep at Carmel. In exchange for that protection, David proposed that Nabal share some of his wealth. Nabal’s scorn angered David, but Nabal’s wife, Abigail, appealed to David not to take revenge. When Abigail told Nabal of his narrow escape, he was evidently so shocked that he had a heart seizure. He died ten days later, and Abigail later became David’s wife (1 Sm 25).<\/p>\n<p>Once more Saul came with an army of 3,000 men into the Ziph Desert to find David, and David again passed up an opportunity to harm the king. Finally realizing the folly of seeking David’s life, Saul abandoned pursuit (1 Sm 26).<\/p>\n<h5>Refuge in Philistia<\/h5>\n<p>David continued to feel unsafe in Saul’s kingdom. Returning to Gath in Philistine country, he was welcomed by King Achish. His followers were allotted the city of Ziklag, where they lived for about 16 months, attracting new recruits from Judah and the rest of Israel (1 Sm 27; 1 Chr 12:19-22).<\/p>\n<p>The Philistine army, marching up to the Megiddo Valley to fight Saul’s army, was uneasy with David’s guerrillas in their rear column, so the commanders put pressure on Achish to dismiss David. When he returned to Ziklag, David found that the city had just been raided by the Amalekites. He pursued the enemy, rescued his people and goods, and divided the spoils with those who had remained behind to guard the supplies (1 Sm 29–30). Meanwhile, the Philistines routed the Israelites at Mt Gilboa, killing Jonathan and two of Saul’s other sons in a fierce battle. Saul, badly wounded, killed himself with his own sword (ch 31).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DavidasKing\">David as King<\/p>\n<p>David ruled over Israel for about 40 years, although the accounts of his reign do not contain enough information for an exact chronology. He began his rule at Hebron and reigned over Judah’s territory for seven or eight years. With the death of Saul’s successor, Ishbosheth, David was recognized as king by all the tribes and made Jerusalem his capital. During the next decade, he unified Israel through military and economic expansion. Then came approximately 10 years of disruption in the royal family. The last years of David’s reign seem to have been devoted to plans for the Jerusalem temple, which was built in the reign of his son Solomon.<\/p>\n<h5>The Years in Hebron<\/h5>\n<p>David was subjected to an unusually rugged period of training for his kingship. Serving under Saul, he gained experience in military exploits against the Philistines. Then, during his fugitive wanderings in the desert area of southern Judah, he ingratiated himself with the landholders and sheep raisers by giving them protection. Being recognized as an outlaw of Israel even enabled him to negotiate diplomatic relations with Moab and Philistia.<\/p>\n<p>David was in Philistine country when news came to him that both Saul and Jonathan had been slain. In a beautiful elegy he paid tribute to his friend Jonathan as well as to King Saul (2 Sm 1).<\/p>\n<p>Sure of God’s guidance, David returned to his home, where the leaders of Judah anointed him king at Hebron. He sent a message of commendation to the men of Jabesh for providing a respectable burial for King Saul, probably also bidding for their support.<\/p>\n<p>Confusion probably swept through Israel when Saul was killed, because the Philistines occupied much of the land. Various leaders gathered whatever fighting men they could find, as old tribal loyalties reasserted themselves. David had most of Judah’s tribe firmly behind him.<\/p>\n<p>A kind of civil war broke out between the followers of David and those of Saul, with David gaining the allegiance of more and more people. Saul’s general, Abner, eventually negotiated peace with David, who requested the restoration of Michal as his wife, indicating that he held no animosity toward Saul’s dynasty. With the consent of Saul’s son Ishbosheth, whom Abner had enthroned as king, Abner went to Hebron and pledged Israel’s support for David. But Abner was killed by Joab, one of David’s captains, in a family vendetta, and soon afterward Ishbosheth was assassinated. David publicly mourned Abner’s death and had Ishbosheth’s two murderers executed. Thus, when Saul’s dynasty ended, David was seen by the people not so much as a challenger but as a logical successor. Hence, he was recognized as king by all Israel (2 Sm 2–4).<\/p>\n<h5>Consolidation in Jerusalem<\/h5>\n<p>When the Israelites turned to David as king, the Philistines became alarmed and attacked (2 Sm 5; 1 Chr 14:8-17). David was strong enough to defeat them and thus unify the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>In search of a more central location for his capital, David turned toward the city of Jerusalem, a Jebusite stronghold. Joab responded to his challenge to conquer the city and was rewarded by being made general of David’s army. Jerusalem became known as the “city of David” (1 Chr 11:4-9).<\/p>\n<p>In the same way that he had organized his earliest followers into an effective guerrilla band (1 Chr 11:1–12:22) at Hebron, David began organizing the whole nation (12:23-40). Once established in Jerusalem, he quickly gained recognition from the Phoenicians, contracting for their artisans to build him a magnificent palace in the new capital (14:1-2). He also made sure that Jerusalem would become Israel’s religious center (2 Sm 6; 1 Chr 13–16). His abortive attempt to move the ark of the covenant by oxcart (cf. Nm 4) reminded the powerful king that he still had to do things God’s way to be successful.<\/p>\n<p>With Jerusalem well established as the nation’s capital, David intended to build God a temple. He shared his plan with the prophet Nathan, whose immediate response was positive. That night, however, God sent a message via Nathan that David should not build the temple. David’s throne would be established eternally, the prophet said, and unlike Saul, King David would have a son to succeed him and perpetuate the kingdom; that son would build the temple (2 Sm 7; 1 Chr 17).<\/p>\n<h5>Prosperity and Supremacy<\/h5>\n<p>Little is recorded about the expansion of David’s rule from the tribal area of Judah to a vast empire stretching from the Nile River of Egypt to regions of the Tigris-Euphrates valley. Nothing in secular history negates the biblical perspective that David had the most powerful kingdom in the heart of that “Fertile Crescent” about 1000 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>It is likely that skirmishes with the Philistines to the west were frequent until they finally became subservient to David and paid him tribute. In Saul’s day the Philistines had enjoyed a monopoly on the use of iron (1 Sm 13:19-21). The fact that David freely used iron near the end of his reign (1 Chr 22:3) hints at profound economic changes in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>David’s kingdom expanded southward as he built military garrisons in Edomite territory. Beyond Edom, he controlled the Moabites and Amalekites, who paid him tribute in silver and gold. To the northeast, Israelite domination was extended over the Ammonites and the Arameans, whose capital was Damascus. David’s treatment of both friends and enemies seemed to contribute to the strength of his kingdom (2 Sm 8–10). Although he was a brilliant military strategist who used all the means and resources available to bring Israel success, David was humble enough to glorify God (2 Sm 22; see Ps 18).<\/p>\n<h5>Sin in the Royal Family<\/h5>\n<p>A lengthy section of the book of 2 Samuel (chs 11–20) gives a remarkably frank account of sin, crime, and rebellion in David’s family. The king’s own imperfections are clearly portrayed; the king of Israel himself could not escape God’s judgement when he did wrong.<\/p>\n<p>Although polygamy was then a Near Eastern status symbol, it was forbidden for a king of Israel (Dt 17:17). David practiced polygamy, however; some of his marriages undoubtedly had political implications (such as his marriages to Saul’s daughter Michal and to princess Maacah of Geshur). Flagrant sins of incest, murder, and rebellion in his family brought David much suffering and almost cost him the throne.<\/p>\n<p>David’s sin of adultery with Bathsheba, committed at the height of his military success and territorial expansion, led him further into evil: he planned a strategy to have Bathsheba’s husband, Uriah, killed on the front line of battle. David seems to have excluded God from consideration in that segment of his personal life. Yet when the prophet Nathan confronted the king with his sins, David acknowledged his guilt. He confessed his sin and pleaded with God for forgiveness (as in Pss 32 and 51). God forgave him, but for nearly ten years David endured the consequences of his lack of self-restraint and his failure to exercise discipline in his family. Although unsurpassed in military and diplomatic strategy, David lacked strength of character in his domestic affairs. Evil fermented in his own house; the father’s self-indulgence was soon reflected in Amnon’s crime of incest, followed by Absalom’s murder of his brother.<\/p>\n<p>Having incurred his father’s disfavor, Absalom took refuge in Geshur with his mother’s people for three years. Joab, David’s general, was eventually able to reconcile David with his alienated son. Absalom, however, having taken advantage of his position in the royal family to gain a following, went to Hebron, staged a surprise rebellion, and proclaimed himself king throughout Israel. His strong following posed such a threat that David fled from Jerusalem. David, still a master strategist, gained time through a ruse to organize his forces and put down his son’s rebellion. Absalom was killed while trying to flee; his death plunged David into grief.<\/p>\n<p>On his return to Jerusalem, David had to work at undoing the damage caused by Absalom’s revolt. His own tribe of Judah, for example, had supported Absalom. Another rebellion, fomented by Sheba of Benjamin’s tribe, had to be suppressed by Joab before the nation could settle down.<\/p>\n<h5>David’s Last Years<\/h5>\n<p>Although David was not permitted to build the temple in Jerusalem, he made extensive preparations for that project during the last years of his reign. He stockpiled materials and organized the kingdom for efficient use of domestic and foreign labor. He also outlined details for religious worship in the new structure (1 Chr 21–29).<\/p>\n<p>The military and civic organization developed by David was probably patterned after Egyptian practice. The army, rigidly controlled by officers of proven loyalty to the king, included mercenaries. The king also appointed trusted supervisors over farms, livestock, and orchards in various parts of his empire (1 Chr 27:25-31).<\/p>\n<p>David took, or at least began, a census of Israel (2 Sm 24; 1 Chr 21). The incompleteness of the accounts leaves unanswered such questions as the reason for God’s punishment. The king overruled Joab’s objection and insisted that the census be taken. Since David later seemed keenly aware that he had sinned in taking the census, it may be that he was motivated by pride to ascertain his exact military strength (approx. 1.5 million men). God may also have been judging the people for their support of the rebellions of Absalom and Sheba.<\/p>\n<p>Through the prophet Gad, David was given a choice of punishments for his sin. He chose a three-day pestilence. As David and the elders repented, they saw an angel on the threshing floor of the Jebusite Ornan (Araunah). David offered sacrifice there and prayed for his people. Later he purchased the threshing floor, located just outside the city of Jerusalem, concluding that it should be the site for the temple to be built by his son Solomon (1 Chr 21:28–22:1).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DavidsLastingInfluence\">David’s Lasting Influence<\/p>\n<h5>The Writer of Psalms<\/h5>\n<p>The OT book of Psalms became one of the most popular books in ancient Israel, and has remained so among countless millions of people throughout the centuries. These words of praise prepared by David were intended for use in the temple worship (2 Chr 29:30). The 73 psalms ascribed to David generally grew out of his own relationship to God and to other persons.<\/p>\n\n<p>David probably compiled Book I of the book of Psalms (1–41) and Book IV (90–106), since most of those psalms were written by David himself. Other psalms of his (Pss 51–71) are in Book II (42–72), which was probably compiled by Solomon. As those psalms were used for worship in later generations, various people added others until the time of Ezra.<\/p>\n<p>David’s psalms provided much of the poetry that was set to music for Israel’s worship. His organization of the priests and Levites and his provision of instruments for worship (2 Chr 7:6; 8:14) set the pattern for generations to come in the religious life of Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>David in the Writings of the Prophets<\/h5>\n<p>David, recognized as the greatest Israelite king, is often mentioned as a standard of comparison in the writings of the OT prophets. Isaiah (as in Is 7:2, 13; 22:22) and Jeremiah often referred to their contemporary kings as belonging to the “house” or “throne” of David. Contrasting David with some of his descendants who did not honor God, both Isaiah and Jeremiah predicted a messianic ruler who would establish justice and righteousness on the throne of David forever (Is 9:7; Jer 33:15). When Isaiah described the coming ruler, he identified him as being from the lineage of Jesse, David’s father (Is 11:1-10). Predicting a period of universal peace, Isaiah saw the capital in “Zion,” identified with the city of David (2:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Ezekiel promised the restoration of David as king in an eschatological and messianic sense (Ez 37:24-25), and of “my servant David” as Israel’s shepherd (34:23). Hosea likewise identified the future ruler as King David (Hos 3:5). Amos assured the people that God would restore the “tabernacle” of David (Am 9:11) so that they could again dwell in safety. Zechariah referred five times to the “house of David” (in Zec 12–13, <span>rsv<\/span>), encouraging the hope of a restoration of David’s glorious dynasty. The concept of the eternal throne promised to David during his reign was delineated in the message of the prophets even while they were announcing judgments to come on the rulers and people of their time.<\/p>\n<h5>David in the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>David is frequently mentioned by the Gospel writers, who established Jesus’ identity as the “son of David.” The covenant God made with David was that an eternal king would come from David’s family (Mt 1:1; 9:27; 12:23; Mk 10:48; 12:35; Lk 18:38-39; 20:41). According to Mark 11:10 and John 7:42, the Jews of Jesus’ day expected the Messiah (Christ) to be a descendant of David. While stating that Jesus came from the lineage of David, the Gospels also clearly teach that Jesus was the Son of God (Mt 22:41-45; Mk 12:35-37; Lk 20:41-44).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Acts, David is recognized as the recipient of God’s promises that were fulfilled in Jesus Christ. David is also seen as a prophet whom the Holy Spirit inspired to write the psalms (Acts 1:16; 2:22-36; 4:25; 13:26-39).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Revelation, Jesus is designated as having the “key of David” (Rv 3:7), and as being “the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David” (5:5). Jesus is quoted as asserting that “I am the root and the offspring of David, the bright morning star” (22:16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Israel, History of; King; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DAVID Israel’s most important king. David’s kingdom represented the epitome of Israel’s power and influence during the nation’s OT history. The two books in the OT devoted to David’s reign are 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles. His earlier years are recorded in 1 Samuel, beginning at chapter 16. Almost half of the biblical psalms are ascribed to David. His importance extends into the NT, where he is identified as an ancestor of Jesus Christ and forerunner of the messianic king. Preview • Early Years ...","summary_en":"DAVID Israel’s most important king. David’s kingdom represented the epitome of Israel’s power and influence during the nation’s OT history. The two books in the OT devoted to David’s reign are 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles. His earlier years are recorded in 1 Samuel, beginning at chapter 16. Almost half of the biblical psalms are ascribed to David. His importance extends into the NT, where he is identified as an ancestor of Jesus Christ and forerunner of the messianic king. Preview • Early Years ...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":13473,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Genealogy of Jesus Christ","title_en":"Genealogy of Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Account of Jesus’ human descent. The NT records Jesus’ genealogy twice in great detail: in Matthew 1:1-17 and in Luke 3:23-38.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Matthew’s Genealogy<\/p>\n<p>• Luke’s Genealogy<\/p>\n<p>• The Relationship between the Two Records<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MatthewsGenealogy\">Matthew’s Genealogy (1:1-17)<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 1:1 presents Jesus Christ as “the son of David, the son of Abraham.” By those two names, Matthew highlights Jesus’ earthly relationship to the Abrahamic (Gn 17:1-8) and Davidic (2 Sm 7:12-16) covenants of promise. Then beginning with the patriarch Abraham, Matthew traces Jesus’ human ancestry through King David to Joseph, “the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ” (Mt 1:16). Matthew summarizes his account: “So all the generations from Abraham to David were fourteen generations, and from David to the deportation to Babylon fourteen generations, and from the deportation to Babylon to the Christ fourteen generations” (v 17, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>An examination of Matthew’s handling of this genealogical material discloses several interesting peculiarities:<\/p>\n\n<p>1. The arrangement of the names into three groups of 14 seems to be an artificial device.<\/p>\n<li>2. To have 14 names in the second group, Matthew omits three kings—Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziah—between Joram and Uzziah (v 8), and one, Jehoiakim, between Josiah and Jeconiah (v 11).<\/li>\n<li>3. In the first group Matthew mentions three women—Tamar, Rahab, and Ruth; and in the second group, he alludes to Bathsheba. This is an uncommon practice in genealogies, and all the more strange when it is noted that these four represent what could be regarded as moral blemishes in the history of the Davidic dynasty— Tamar, a victim of incest; Rahab, a prostitute; Ruth, a Moabitess; and Bathsheba, an adulteress.<\/li>\n<li>4. In the first group Matthew mentions Judah’s brothers and Zerah, Perez’s brother. In the second group he refers to Jeconiah’s brothers.<\/li>\n<li>5. In verse 6 David is called “the king.”<\/li>\n<p>From these data, it is obvious that Matthew does not intend to present a strict genealogy; the arrangement is contrived, and extraneous material is included, probably for some other purpose than merely to present Jesus’ forebears. Matthew’s arrangement of the names into groups of 14, probably guided by an interest in portraying Jesus to Jews as the promised king of Israel and rightful heir to the Davidic throne, gives a definite historical movement to the genealogy by dividing it into three periods of time. These respectively highlight the origin, rise to power, and decay of the Davidic house, the last point represented by the lowly birth of the promised heir to a carpenter of Nazareth.<\/p>\n<p>The 14 names in each group may be an effort to call attention to the thrice-royal character of Mary’s son by focusing on the numerical value 14 of the Hebrew letters in David’s name (d=4, v=6, d=4). This number also happens to be twice the sacred number seven, so that the whole list is composed of three sets of two sevens each. It may be, however, that the contrived groupings were merely intended to aid in memorization.<\/p>\n<p>With respect to the second peculiarity—the “missing name” in the third group—one must conclude that either David or Jeconiah is to be counted twice, these being the pivotal names separating the three groups, or that a name was mistakenly dropped out in a copy of Matthew’s original Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The third peculiarity presents no difficulty at all. Numerous genealogies in Scripture omit some names. Ancient Near Eastern writers often used the phrase “the son of,” or the word “begat,” quite flexibly, relating grandsons or great-grandsons, for instance, to earlier forebears without indicating every intervening ancestor. The modern mind should not require a precision in ancient records that ancient writers themselves did not insist on.<\/p>\n<p>The women listed in the genealogy—the fourth peculiarity—may have been intended to disarm Jewish criticism about Jesus’ birth (1:18-25) by showing that irregular unions were not disqualifications for the Messiah’s legal ancestry.<\/p>\n<p>The reason for including several brothers in the genealogy at three points—the fifth peculiarity—is not readily discernible. The mention of “Judah and his brothers” (1:2) may simply be following an established practice of speaking of the 12 patriarchs together.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, David’s description as “the king” (1:6) underscores the Davidic or royal character of the list.<\/p>\n<p>The sources employed in compiling the first group in the genealogy drew upon records preserved in 1 Chronicles 1:27–2:15 and in Ruth 4:18-22. The second group followed the records found in 1—2 Kings and 2 Chronicles. The third group relied mainly on public or private records from the intertestamental period; the nine names from Abiud to Jacob are not mentioned elsewhere in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>On the basis of this genealogy, if there had been a Davidic throne in Joseph’s day, the lowly carpenter would have been the legal heir to it, and Jesus stood after him as the next in line to inherit the royal seat.<\/p>\n<p>It has been argued against this understanding of Matthew’s genealogy that the presence of Jeconiah in the list (Mt 1:11) jeopardizes, if not completely negates, the legal claim to the Davidic throne of everyone descending directly from him. That is because the Lord declared of him: “Write this man down as childless, . . . for none of his offspring shall succeed in sitting on the throne of David, and ruling again in Judah” (Jer 22:30, <span>rsv<\/span>). Therefore, it is said, it could not have been Matthew’s intention to represent the men from Shealtiel to Joseph as legal heirs to the throne.<\/p>\n<p>This is a point that admittedly could dispose of the view that the list presents David’s descendants if it were not for the fact that Shealtiel, who in Matthew’s record is represented as the son of Jeconiah, appears also in Luke’s genealogy as the son of Neri (Lk 3:27). Neri’s name is unique to Luke’s Gospel, so it is impossible to check its use elsewhere to discover the actual parentage of Shealtiel. But it is not surprising in the light of Jeremiah 22:30 to find him listed in both accounts with different parents. Neri most likely was Shealtiel’s real father, and while it is impossible to determine Neri’s precise relationship to Jeconiah, it may be that those responsible for determining and keeping the record of the legal heirs to the Davidic throne looked to the collateral line of Neri and selected Shealtiel as the man to be legally adopted into the line and the one through whom the line would continue. Shealtiel may well have died without a male descendant, which made it necessary to look to Zerubbabel, the son of Pedaiah, Shealtiel’s brother by adoption, as the legal heir to the Davidic throne. By this pair of adoptions, the curse upon Jeconiah was fulfilled while an actual grandson of Jeconiah continued the line, inasmuch as the grandson was legally the son of Shealtiel, who in turn was the actual son of Neri. Jeconiah’s presence in the genealogy is a strength, rather than a weakness, for the interpretation that Matthew’s Gospel intended to present the legal heirs of the Davidic throne, since only a writer conscious of the problems surrounding Jeconiah’s lineage, but also aware of an explanation, would present such an ancestry to a Jewish audience he was seeking to convince that Jesus was indeed the royal Messiah.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LukesGenealogy\">Luke’s Genealogy (3:23-38)<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s genealogy also has peculiarities.<\/p>\n<p>1. Some expositors have thought it significant that Luke’s genealogy appears not at the beginning of the Gospel but at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry.<\/p>\n<li>2. Luke’s account, in contrast to Matthew’s, begins with Jesus and traces his lineage back through OT history. This seems irregular, for most genealogies follow the order of succession.<\/li>\n<li>3. Luke’s account, furthermore, does not end with Abraham but goes all the way back to “Adam, the son of God” (Lk 3:38).<\/li>\n<p>Some have seen the first peculiarity as a result of Luke’s desire to bring a period of sacred history to its close, and to signal the beginning of another with the person and especially the ministry of Jesus. The genealogy, located as it is, sets off the work of Christ from the accounts of his birth and preparation.<\/p>\n<p>Many have suggested that the regressive order in the genealogy is probably Luke’s instrument to focus attention on Jesus. The fact that Luke traced Jesus’ ancestry back to Adam, “the son of God,” was probably due to the fact that he wrote for Romans and Greeks. By tracing Jesus’ ancestry back to Adam, he shows Jesus to be related to the whole human race. In Luke’s genealogy Jesus and Adam are both “sons of God”; Jesus, of course, is the son of God by nature; Adam, the son of God by having been created in God’s image.<\/p>\n<p>As to his sources, it is rather certain that Luke used the Septuagint version (ancient Greek version of the OT) of Genesis 11:12, which inserts the name Cainan between Shelah and Arphaxad (Lk 3:36), and the records of 1 Chronicles 1–3 for the history down to David. For the period from David to Jesus, most expositors agree that Luke relied upon information probably received directly from Mary or from persons close to her. It was a common practice among the Jewish people for genealogical records to be maintained both publicly and privately. There was special concern in families of Davidic descent to preserve their ancestral records because of OT prophecies that Messiah would be born in the house of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke no doubt intended to accomplish more by his list than merely a presentation of a number of Jesus’ ancestors. Since Luke did not highlight David in his list, it may be assumed that he was not zealous to present a list of legal heirs to the Davidic throne—not that the issue is of no concern to him (cf. Lk 1:27, 32, 69; 2:4, 11). Rather, a concern throughout Luke’s Gospel is this emphasis—that of portraying the Christ as the Savior of Romans and Greeks—indeed, of the world. Therefore, though Luke traced Jesus’ ancestry through Joseph’s ancestral line to David, he continued beyond David to Adam. Jesus is a member of the race to which all people belong.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRelationshipbetweentheTwoRecords\">The Relationship between the Two Records<\/p>\n<p>Even a cursory examination of the two genealogies of Jesus will show several differences. For example, Matthew’s genealogy comprises 41 generations, while Luke lists 76. Luke includes the period between Adam and Abraham; Matthew does not. While the two lists are practically identical from Abraham to David, they diverge for the period from David to Jesus, Matthew tracing Jesus’ lineage from David through Solomon in 27 generations, whereas Luke traces Jesus’ lineage from David through Nathan, another son, in 42 generations. Furthermore, at only one point do the lines converge during this period: at the names of Shealtiel and Zerubbabel, who are doubtless the same men in both lists. Finally, Matthew represents Joseph as the son of Jacob (Mt 1:16), whereas in Luke’s account he is the son of Heli (Lk 3:23).<\/p>\n<p>How are these differences to be explained? The differences between these lists stem from the purposes for which they were compiled and the meanings they were intended to convey.<\/p>\n<p>A widely held explanation is that Matthew gives Jesus’ ancestry through Joseph and that Luke gives his ancestry through Mary. On this interpretation Jacob was Joseph’s real father, and Heli (probably Mary’s father) became Joseph’s foster father, that is, Joseph was Heli’s “son,” or heir, by his marriage to Mary, assuming that Heli had no sons (cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12). This view is certainly a possibility and should not be rejected out of hand. If Mary was a direct descendant of David, it could be literally said of any son of hers, “He is the seed of David.”<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, many scholars prefer to regard Luke’s genealogy as that of Joseph rather than Mary, since it is to Joseph’s ancestry that Luke calls the reader’s attention (Lk 1:27; 2:4). Furthermore, nowhere in Scripture is Mary said to be of Davidic descent. If the fact that Joseph was not the actual father of Jesus nullifies any value that Joseph’s lineage might otherwise possess for a real son, why does Luke point to Joseph’s lineage twice, and to Mary’s not at all?<\/p>\n<p>A major difficulty for the view that regards both genealogies as Joseph’s is related to Joseph’s two fathers. One solution is that Matthew gives the legal descendants of David but Luke gives the actual descendants of David in the line to which Joseph belonged. This would mean that Heli was Joseph’s real father and that Jacob was his legal foster father. How this could be is readily explainable. Assuming that Jacob’s father, Matthan (Mt 1:15), and Heli’s father, Matthat (Lk 3:24), are the same person, then Jacob (the elder) may have died without a male descendant so that his nephew, the son of his brother Heli, would have become his heir.<\/p>\n<p>If Matthan and Matthat are not the same person, one might postulate that Jacob, the legal heir to the throne, died without a descendant and that Joseph, son of Heli, became the legal heir immediately upon the death of Heli and was counted as Jacob’s son in a list of legal heirs to the throne. Possibly Heli, a relative, married Jacob’s widow, thereby making Joseph, the son of that union, Heli’s son and Jacob’s son by levirate marriage. In other words, there are a number of possible explanations of this divergence.<\/p>\n<p>One other major objection to the view that regards both genealogies as Joseph’s is that, because of the virgin birth of Jesus, one may in no sense speak of Jesus as being literally the seed of David—a proposition that Scripture seems to insist upon. This objection has been adequately countered: (1) because of the realistic manner in which the Jews looked upon adoptive fatherhood; and (2) because the relationship in which Jesus stood to Joseph was much closer than a case of ordinary adoption, there being no earthly father to dispute Joseph’s paternal relation to Jesus. Jesus could and would have been regarded as Joseph’s son and heir with complete propriety, satisfying every scriptural demand that he be the “seed of David.” The question, therefore, whether Mary as well as Joseph was a descendant of David does not need to be answered one way or the other by one who desires to defend Jesus’ Davidic descent.<\/p>\n<p>It is beyond human reach to discover for certain the full solution to the divergences between the two genealogies of Jesus, or the actual relationship of Jesus to them. Enough has been said to demonstrate that they are reconcilable, and the purposes of each, suggested here, indicate that either of the ways outlined above does full justice to the Davidic descent of Jesus, as rightful heir to his ancestor’s covenanted throne, and also to his virgin birth by Mary.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Genealogy; Incarnation; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Account of Jesus’ human descent. The NT records Jesus’ genealogy twice in great detail: in Matthew 1:1-17 and in Luke 3:23-38.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Matthew’s Genealogy<\/p>\n<p>• Luke’s Genealogy<\/p>\n<p>• The Relationship between the Two Records<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MatthewsGenealogy\">Matthew’s Genealogy (1:1-17)<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 1:1 presents Jesus Christ as “the son of David, the son of Abraham.” By those two names, Matthew highlights Jesus’ earthly relationship to the Abrahamic (Gn 17:1-8) and Davidic (2 Sm 7:12-16) covenants of promise. Then beginning with the patriarch Abraham, Matthew traces Jesus’ human ancestry through King David to Joseph, “the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ” (Mt 1:16). Matthew summarizes his account: “So all the generations from Abraham to David were fourteen generations, and from David to the deportation to Babylon fourteen generations, and from the deportation to Babylon to the Christ fourteen generations” (v 17, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>An examination of Matthew’s handling of this genealogical material discloses several interesting peculiarities:<\/p>\n\n<p>1. The arrangement of the names into three groups of 14 seems to be an artificial device.<\/p>\n<li>2. To have 14 names in the second group, Matthew omits three kings—Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziah—between Joram and Uzziah (v 8), and one, Jehoiakim, between Josiah and Jeconiah (v 11).<\/li>\n<li>3. In the first group Matthew mentions three women—Tamar, Rahab, and Ruth; and in the second group, he alludes to Bathsheba. This is an uncommon practice in genealogies, and all the more strange when it is noted that these four represent what could be regarded as moral blemishes in the history of the Davidic dynasty— Tamar, a victim of incest; Rahab, a prostitute; Ruth, a Moabitess; and Bathsheba, an adulteress.<\/li>\n<li>4. In the first group Matthew mentions Judah’s brothers and Zerah, Perez’s brother. In the second group he refers to Jeconiah’s brothers.<\/li>\n<li>5. In verse 6 David is called “the king.”<\/li>\n<p>From these data, it is obvious that Matthew does not intend to present a strict genealogy; the arrangement is contrived, and extraneous material is included, probably for some other purpose than merely to present Jesus’ forebears. Matthew’s arrangement of the names into groups of 14, probably guided by an interest in portraying Jesus to Jews as the promised king of Israel and rightful heir to the Davidic throne, gives a definite historical movement to the genealogy by dividing it into three periods of time. These respectively highlight the origin, rise to power, and decay of the Davidic house, the last point represented by the lowly birth of the promised heir to a carpenter of Nazareth.<\/p>\n<p>The 14 names in each group may be an effort to call attention to the thrice-royal character of Mary’s son by focusing on the numerical value 14 of the Hebrew letters in David’s name (d=4, v=6, d=4). This number also happens to be twice the sacred number seven, so that the whole list is composed of three sets of two sevens each. It may be, however, that the contrived groupings were merely intended to aid in memorization.<\/p>\n<p>With respect to the second peculiarity—the “missing name” in the third group—one must conclude that either David or Jeconiah is to be counted twice, these being the pivotal names separating the three groups, or that a name was mistakenly dropped out in a copy of Matthew’s original Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The third peculiarity presents no difficulty at all. Numerous genealogies in Scripture omit some names. Ancient Near Eastern writers often used the phrase “the son of,” or the word “begat,” quite flexibly, relating grandsons or great-grandsons, for instance, to earlier forebears without indicating every intervening ancestor. The modern mind should not require a precision in ancient records that ancient writers themselves did not insist on.<\/p>\n<p>The women listed in the genealogy—the fourth peculiarity—may have been intended to disarm Jewish criticism about Jesus’ birth (1:18-25) by showing that irregular unions were not disqualifications for the Messiah’s legal ancestry.<\/p>\n<p>The reason for including several brothers in the genealogy at three points—the fifth peculiarity—is not readily discernible. The mention of “Judah and his brothers” (1:2) may simply be following an established practice of speaking of the 12 patriarchs together.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, David’s description as “the king” (1:6) underscores the Davidic or royal character of the list.<\/p>\n<p>The sources employed in compiling the first group in the genealogy drew upon records preserved in 1 Chronicles 1:27–2:15 and in Ruth 4:18-22. The second group followed the records found in 1—2 Kings and 2 Chronicles. The third group relied mainly on public or private records from the intertestamental period; the nine names from Abiud to Jacob are not mentioned elsewhere in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>On the basis of this genealogy, if there had been a Davidic throne in Joseph’s day, the lowly carpenter would have been the legal heir to it, and Jesus stood after him as the next in line to inherit the royal seat.<\/p>\n<p>It has been argued against this understanding of Matthew’s genealogy that the presence of Jeconiah in the list (Mt 1:11) jeopardizes, if not completely negates, the legal claim to the Davidic throne of everyone descending directly from him. That is because the Lord declared of him: “Write this man down as childless, . . . for none of his offspring shall succeed in sitting on the throne of David, and ruling again in Judah” (Jer 22:30, <span>rsv<\/span>). Therefore, it is said, it could not have been Matthew’s intention to represent the men from Shealtiel to Joseph as legal heirs to the throne.<\/p>\n<p>This is a point that admittedly could dispose of the view that the list presents David’s descendants if it were not for the fact that Shealtiel, who in Matthew’s record is represented as the son of Jeconiah, appears also in Luke’s genealogy as the son of Neri (Lk 3:27). Neri’s name is unique to Luke’s Gospel, so it is impossible to check its use elsewhere to discover the actual parentage of Shealtiel. But it is not surprising in the light of Jeremiah 22:30 to find him listed in both accounts with different parents. Neri most likely was Shealtiel’s real father, and while it is impossible to determine Neri’s precise relationship to Jeconiah, it may be that those responsible for determining and keeping the record of the legal heirs to the Davidic throne looked to the collateral line of Neri and selected Shealtiel as the man to be legally adopted into the line and the one through whom the line would continue. Shealtiel may well have died without a male descendant, which made it necessary to look to Zerubbabel, the son of Pedaiah, Shealtiel’s brother by adoption, as the legal heir to the Davidic throne. By this pair of adoptions, the curse upon Jeconiah was fulfilled while an actual grandson of Jeconiah continued the line, inasmuch as the grandson was legally the son of Shealtiel, who in turn was the actual son of Neri. Jeconiah’s presence in the genealogy is a strength, rather than a weakness, for the interpretation that Matthew’s Gospel intended to present the legal heirs of the Davidic throne, since only a writer conscious of the problems surrounding Jeconiah’s lineage, but also aware of an explanation, would present such an ancestry to a Jewish audience he was seeking to convince that Jesus was indeed the royal Messiah.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LukesGenealogy\">Luke’s Genealogy (3:23-38)<\/p>\n<p>Luke’s genealogy also has peculiarities.<\/p>\n<p>1. Some expositors have thought it significant that Luke’s genealogy appears not at the beginning of the Gospel but at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry.<\/p>\n<li>2. Luke’s account, in contrast to Matthew’s, begins with Jesus and traces his lineage back through OT history. This seems irregular, for most genealogies follow the order of succession.<\/li>\n<li>3. Luke’s account, furthermore, does not end with Abraham but goes all the way back to “Adam, the son of God” (Lk 3:38).<\/li>\n<p>Some have seen the first peculiarity as a result of Luke’s desire to bring a period of sacred history to its close, and to signal the beginning of another with the person and especially the ministry of Jesus. The genealogy, located as it is, sets off the work of Christ from the accounts of his birth and preparation.<\/p>\n<p>Many have suggested that the regressive order in the genealogy is probably Luke’s instrument to focus attention on Jesus. The fact that Luke traced Jesus’ ancestry back to Adam, “the son of God,” was probably due to the fact that he wrote for Romans and Greeks. By tracing Jesus’ ancestry back to Adam, he shows Jesus to be related to the whole human race. In Luke’s genealogy Jesus and Adam are both “sons of God”; Jesus, of course, is the son of God by nature; Adam, the son of God by having been created in God’s image.<\/p>\n<p>As to his sources, it is rather certain that Luke used the Septuagint version (ancient Greek version of the OT) of Genesis 11:12, which inserts the name Cainan between Shelah and Arphaxad (Lk 3:36), and the records of 1 Chronicles 1–3 for the history down to David. For the period from David to Jesus, most expositors agree that Luke relied upon information probably received directly from Mary or from persons close to her. It was a common practice among the Jewish people for genealogical records to be maintained both publicly and privately. There was special concern in families of Davidic descent to preserve their ancestral records because of OT prophecies that Messiah would be born in the house of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke no doubt intended to accomplish more by his list than merely a presentation of a number of Jesus’ ancestors. Since Luke did not highlight David in his list, it may be assumed that he was not zealous to present a list of legal heirs to the Davidic throne—not that the issue is of no concern to him (cf. Lk 1:27, 32, 69; 2:4, 11). Rather, a concern throughout Luke’s Gospel is this emphasis—that of portraying the Christ as the Savior of Romans and Greeks—indeed, of the world. Therefore, though Luke traced Jesus’ ancestry through Joseph’s ancestral line to David, he continued beyond David to Adam. Jesus is a member of the race to which all people belong.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRelationshipbetweentheTwoRecords\">The Relationship between the Two Records<\/p>\n<p>Even a cursory examination of the two genealogies of Jesus will show several differences. For example, Matthew’s genealogy comprises 41 generations, while Luke lists 76. Luke includes the period between Adam and Abraham; Matthew does not. While the two lists are practically identical from Abraham to David, they diverge for the period from David to Jesus, Matthew tracing Jesus’ lineage from David through Solomon in 27 generations, whereas Luke traces Jesus’ lineage from David through Nathan, another son, in 42 generations. Furthermore, at only one point do the lines converge during this period: at the names of Shealtiel and Zerubbabel, who are doubtless the same men in both lists. Finally, Matthew represents Joseph as the son of Jacob (Mt 1:16), whereas in Luke’s account he is the son of Heli (Lk 3:23).<\/p>\n<p>How are these differences to be explained? The differences between these lists stem from the purposes for which they were compiled and the meanings they were intended to convey.<\/p>\n<p>A widely held explanation is that Matthew gives Jesus’ ancestry through Joseph and that Luke gives his ancestry through Mary. On this interpretation Jacob was Joseph’s real father, and Heli (probably Mary’s father) became Joseph’s foster father, that is, Joseph was Heli’s “son,” or heir, by his marriage to Mary, assuming that Heli had no sons (cf. Nm 27:1-11; 36:1-12). This view is certainly a possibility and should not be rejected out of hand. If Mary was a direct descendant of David, it could be literally said of any son of hers, “He is the seed of David.”<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, many scholars prefer to regard Luke’s genealogy as that of Joseph rather than Mary, since it is to Joseph’s ancestry that Luke calls the reader’s attention (Lk 1:27; 2:4). Furthermore, nowhere in Scripture is Mary said to be of Davidic descent. If the fact that Joseph was not the actual father of Jesus nullifies any value that Joseph’s lineage might otherwise possess for a real son, why does Luke point to Joseph’s lineage twice, and to Mary’s not at all?<\/p>\n<p>A major difficulty for the view that regards both genealogies as Joseph’s is related to Joseph’s two fathers. One solution is that Matthew gives the legal descendants of David but Luke gives the actual descendants of David in the line to which Joseph belonged. This would mean that Heli was Joseph’s real father and that Jacob was his legal foster father. How this could be is readily explainable. Assuming that Jacob’s father, Matthan (Mt 1:15), and Heli’s father, Matthat (Lk 3:24), are the same person, then Jacob (the elder) may have died without a male descendant so that his nephew, the son of his brother Heli, would have become his heir.<\/p>\n<p>If Matthan and Matthat are not the same person, one might postulate that Jacob, the legal heir to the throne, died without a descendant and that Joseph, son of Heli, became the legal heir immediately upon the death of Heli and was counted as Jacob’s son in a list of legal heirs to the throne. Possibly Heli, a relative, married Jacob’s widow, thereby making Joseph, the son of that union, Heli’s son and Jacob’s son by levirate marriage. In other words, there are a number of possible explanations of this divergence.<\/p>\n<p>One other major objection to the view that regards both genealogies as Joseph’s is that, because of the virgin birth of Jesus, one may in no sense speak of Jesus as being literally the seed of David—a proposition that Scripture seems to insist upon. This objection has been adequately countered: (1) because of the realistic manner in which the Jews looked upon adoptive fatherhood; and (2) because the relationship in which Jesus stood to Joseph was much closer than a case of ordinary adoption, there being no earthly father to dispute Joseph’s paternal relation to Jesus. Jesus could and would have been regarded as Joseph’s son and heir with complete propriety, satisfying every scriptural demand that he be the “seed of David.” The question, therefore, whether Mary as well as Joseph was a descendant of David does not need to be answered one way or the other by one who desires to defend Jesus’ Davidic descent.<\/p>\n<p>It is beyond human reach to discover for certain the full solution to the divergences between the two genealogies of Jesus, or the actual relationship of Jesus to them. Enough has been said to demonstrate that they are reconcilable, and the purposes of each, suggested here, indicate that either of the ways outlined above does full justice to the Davidic descent of Jesus, as rightful heir to his ancestor’s covenanted throne, and also to his virgin birth by Mary.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Genealogy; Incarnation; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST Account of Jesus’ human descent. The NT records Jesus’ genealogy twice in great detail: in Matthew 1:1-17 and in Luke 3:23-38. Preview • Matthew’s Genealogy • Luke’s Genealogy • The Relationship between the Two Records Matthew’s Genealogy (1:1-17) Matthew 1:1 presents Jesus Christ as “the son of David, the son of Abraham.” By those two names, Matthew highlights Jesus’ earthly relationship to the Abrahamic (Gn 17:1-8) and Davidic (2 Sm 7:12-16) covenants of promise. T...","summary_en":"GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST Account of Jesus’ human descent. The NT records Jesus’ genealogy twice in great detail: in Matthew 1:1-17 and in Luke 3:23-38. Preview • Matthew’s Genealogy • Luke’s Genealogy • The Relationship between the Two Records Matthew’s Genealogy (1:1-17) Matthew 1:1 presents Jesus Christ as “the son of David, the son of Abraham.” By those two names, Matthew highlights Jesus’ earthly relationship to the Abrahamic (Gn 17:1-8) and Davidic (2 Sm 7:12-16) covenants of promise. T...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":16365,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Hezron (Person)","title_en":"Hezron (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>HEZRON (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Reuben’s son (Gn 46:9; Ex 6:14; 1 Chr 5:3) and founder of the Hezronite family in Reuben’s tribe (Nm 26:6).<\/li>\n<li>2. Perez’s son (Gn 46:12; Ru 4:18-19; 1 Chr 2:5-25; 4:1), founder of the Hezronite family in Judah’s tribe (Nm 26:21), and an ancestor of Jesus Christ (Mt 1:3; Lk 3:33).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HEZRON (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Reuben’s son (Gn 46:9; Ex 6:14; 1 Chr 5:3) and founder of the Hezronite family in Reuben’s tribe (Nm 26:6).<\/li>\n<li>2. Perez’s son (Gn 46:12; Ru 4:18-19; 1 Chr 2:5-25; 4:1), founder of the Hezronite family in Judah’s tribe (Nm 26:21), and an ancestor of Jesus Christ (Mt 1:3; Lk 3:33).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HEZRON (Person) 1. Reuben’s son (Gn 46:9; Ex 6:14; 1 Chr 5:3) and founder of the Hezronite family in Reuben’s tribe (Nm 26:6). 2. Perez’s son (Gn 46:12; Ru 4:18-19; 1 Chr 2:5-25; 4:1), founder of the Hezronite family in Judah’s tribe (Nm 26:21), and an ancestor of Jesus Christ (Mt 1:3; Lk 3:33). See also Genealogy of Jesus Christ.","summary_en":"HEZRON (Person) 1. Reuben’s son (Gn 46:9; Ex 6:14; 1 Chr 5:3) and founder of the Hezronite family in Reuben’s tribe (Nm 26:6). 2. Perez’s son (Gn 46:12; Ru 4:18-19; 1 Chr 2:5-25; 4:1), founder of the Hezronite family in Judah’s tribe (Nm 26:21), and an ancestor of Jesus Christ (Mt 1:3; Lk 3:33). See also Genealogy of Jesus Christ.","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24459,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Marriage Customs Marriage","title_en":"Marriage Customs Marriage","content_ro":"<h3>MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS<\/h3>\n<p>The joining together of male and female in matrimony, as practiced by various cultures.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of marriage was ordained by God in his instruction to Adam that a man should leave his father and mother, and that he and his wife should be as one flesh (Gn 2:24).<\/p>\n<p>Several forms of marriage are referred to in the OT, the earliest of which seems to be based on a matrilineal principle. Although there appears to be some evidence for this in the middle Bronze Age and in the early monarchy, it is difficult to be certain about the matter, despite the importance in Egypt, and perhaps elsewhere, of the role of the mother in determining descent.<\/p>\n<p>Generally, the bride left her parents when she married and went to live with her husband’s clan, as Rebekah did (Gn 24:58-59). The phrase “to marry a wife” is from a root meaning to “become master” (Dt 21:13), and the wife frequently treated her husband as, and referred to him as, master.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew genealogical lists indicate that descent was reckoned through the male line (Gn 5:10; 36:9-43; Nm 1:1-15; Ru 4:18-22; 1 Chr 1:1-9). The important right of naming a child, indicating power and authority over that child, was exercised almost equally between father and mother in biblical references (cf. Gn 4:1, 25-26; 5:29; 35:18; 1 Sm 1:20; 4:21; Is 8:3; Hos 1:4-9). Sons were frequently named after their fathers and were identified with them.<\/p>\n<p>The father was the authority figure in the home in a patriarchal society. His wife and children were regarded as his possessions in somewhat the same way as his fields and livestock (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21). He had the right to sell his daughters (Ex 21:7; Neh 5:5), and even had the power of life and death over his children.<\/p>\n<p>The ease with which a man could terminate a marriage by divorcing his wife also shows the measure of his authority in the family (Dt 24:1-4; cf. 22:13-21).<\/p>\n<p>A levirate marriage was instituted to preserve a family name and inheritance. When a man died, the responsibility for maintaining his widow and any children that she might have fell upon her husband’s closest male relative. The order of responsibility is set out in Deuteronomy 25:5-10. Normally, the brother of the deceased husband living with the clan was expected to enter into a levirate marriage with the widow. If she was childless, the firstborn of the new marriage was regarded as a child of the deceased. Levirate marriage was also known to the Canaanites, Assyrians, and Hittites.<\/p>\n<p>The most familiar levirate situation in the OT, although not conforming strictly to the law of Deuteronomy 25, is described in the book of Ruth. It was essential for Ruth to find some close male relative to marry her so that the family name and property could be preserved. The closest male relative declined the responsibility, feeling that it was a double imposition, first, to have to purchase the land and support Ruth, and second, to know that the first son would be regarded as her dead husband’s child, bearing his name and inheriting the land. Boaz agreed to undertake the responsibility (Ru 2:20–4:10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite numerous examples of polygamy cited in the OT, there is no doubt that the vast majority of the Israelites were monogamous. There are no examples given of large polygamous marriages in the families of commoners.<\/p>\n<p>The original instruction to Adam was that a “man . . . cleaves to his wife” (Gn 2:24). Hebrew laws generally imply that a marriage with one wife is the most acceptable form of marriage (Ex 20:17; 21:5; Lv 18:8, 16-20; 20:10; Nm 5:12; Dt 5:21). Although this seems to have become the norm by the time of the monarchy, a king such as Solomon did not follow Hebrew traditions in this matter. In the postexilic period marriages were predominantly monogamous, although they were being terminated increasingly by divorce. In the NT period monogamy seems to have been the rule, although persons such as Herod the Great were polygamous. Christ taught that marriage should last the lifetime of the partners, and if a man divorced his wife and married another woman during his previous spouse’s lifetime, he committed adultery (Mt 5:31-32).<\/p>\n<p>Marriage generally took place with those who were close to the immediate family circle, and it was imperative, therefore, that limits on acceptable consanguinity should be imposed. In patriarchal times a man could marry his half sister on his father’s side (Gn 20:12), and this continued to be the case even under David (2 Sm 13:13), although it was specifically forbidden in Leviticus 20:17. As there is some contradiction between the marriage laws of Deuteronomy and those in the Law of Holiness (Dt 25:5; Lv 18:16), it is possible that there was some modification of the stricter Levitical regulations. Marriages between cousins, such as Isaac with Rebekah, and Jacob with Rachel and Leah, were common. When a close relative was interested in marriage, it was almost impossible to refuse (Tb 6:13; 7:11-12). Moses was the offspring of a marriage between nephew and aunt (Ex 6:20; Nm 26:59), which would have been forbidden in Leviticus 18:12-13 and 20:19, as would Jacob’s marriage with two sisters at the same time (Gn 29:30).<\/p>\n<p>When the Israelites settled in Canaan, many of them married Canaanite women, much to the consternation of those who desired to maintain the purity of the Hebrew religion (1 Kgs 11:4). Such intermarriage was prohibited under Mosaic law (Ex 34:15-16; Dt 7:3-4), although many Israelites ignored these regulations and continued to indulge in mixed marriages. If a woman was captured in war and was prepared to abandon her native country, an exception could be made (Dt 21:10-14). By contrast, Samson married a Philistine woman who remained with her own people, but who received conjugal visits from her husband periodically (Jgs 14:8–15:2).<\/p>\n<p>The danger of intermarriage affecting the purity of Hebrew religion was considered so great that in the postexilic period wholesale divorce was ordered where Jews had married foreign wives (Ezr 9:2; 10:3, 16-17). The intent was that the national religion should remain pure, even though homes and families were destroyed. Even in NT times, Paul denounced marriage with non-Christians (2 Cor 6:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to estimate at what age young people married. A boy was considered to be a man by his early teens, and late in Jewish tradition this transition was celebrated by the bar mitzvah, which generally occurred when the boy was 13.<\/p>\n<p>Normally the young man’s parents chose the bride. The resulting discussion about the marriage occurred between the groom’s parents and the bride’s parents, and often neither of the young people was consulted. It was not essential for the eldest in the family to be married first (Gn 29:26). When Abraham decided that Isaac should be married, a servant was sent to choose a bride from among Abraham’s relatives in Mesopotamia. The servant made contact with the bride’s brother and mother (24:33-53), and it was only afterward that Rebekah was asked to give her consent (vv 57-58). Her father was possibly incapacitated; otherwise, it would have been unlikely that her consent would have been asked at all.<\/p>\n<p>One of the reasons why the average young man would not have been able to afford more than one wife was the practice of the bride-price, which had to be paid to the bride’s father. It was possible to substitute service for the bride-price (Gn 29:15-30), or the completion of an appointed task (1 Sm 18:25-27). A specific sum is mentioned for the bride-price in the case of a virgin who had been raped and who had to be purchased by her seducer. The price was set at 50 shekels, but this was considered to be a punishment; it is probable that the normal amount was between 10 and 320 shekels (Lv 27:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>At the time of the second temple, a virgin bride was considered to be worth 50 shekels, and a widow or divorced woman about half that sum. During this period, a virgin bride was normally married in midweek so that, if her husband found her not to be a virgin, he could bring proof to the court the following day, which would still be in advance of the Sabbath. A widow or a divorced woman normally married on the equivalent of a Thursday, giving her a full day with her husband before the Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>Marriage was a covenant or alliance between two families. It thus united them, and by extending the kinship, the overall size of the group was increased. This was important in a society where responsibilities for relatives, however distant, were accepted unhesitatingly. The covenant concept also could have political overtones, as with the marriage between Solomon and the Egyptian princess (1 Kgs 11:1) or Ahab of Israel and Jezebel of Tyre (16:31).<\/p>\n<p>The sealing of the covenant included the transfer of gifts, which would establish the wealth and status of the donor and of the bride (Gn 34:12). In the ancient Near East, the giving of a gift was thought to include a part of the donor, so that the giver was actually offering a portion of himself. The gift that sealed the covenant also established the donor’s authority over the bride.<\/p>\n<p>The next stage in the marriage procedure was the betrothal. First mentioned in Exodus 22:16, the term is used several times in Deuteronomy (Dt 20:7; 22:23-24). The betrothal had the legal status of a marriage (Dt 28:30; 2 Sm 3:14), and anyone violating a betrothed virgin would be stoned, according to the law of Deuteronomy, for violating his neighbor’s “wife” (Dt 22:23-24). The meaning of a betrothal involved taking possession, in a manner similar to that of receiving tribute. Nevertheless, there remained a distinction between betrothing a woman and taking her as a wife (20:7). During the period of betrothal, the prospective groom was exempt from military service. It was assumed that the betrothal was a formal part of a permanent relationship (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:27; 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>A man who was to marry another’s daughter was already regarded as a son-in-law at the time of betrothal (Gn 19:14). Mary, as Joseph’s betrothed, was actually considered his wife, although he did not have intercourse with her until after the birth of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The first biblical record of a wedding being celebrated by a feast is in the story of Jacob (Gn 29:22). There was no actual marriage contract recorded until its mention in the book of Tobit (Tb 7:12). This contract was not considered valid until the couple had cohabited for a week (Gn 29:27; Jgs 14:12, 18). When Samson left his bride before the end of the seven-day period, the bride’s parents considered the marriage void and gave her to another man (Jgs 14:20).<\/p>\n<p>The wedding was an occasion of great family rejoicing. The special clothing of the bride and groom (Is 61:10; Ez 16:9-13) included for the bride a fine dress often adorned with jewels (Ps 45:14-15; Is 61:10) and other ornaments, while the bridegroom had fine clothing and wore a diadem (Sg 3:11; Is 61:10). The bride wore a veil (Gn 24:65; Sg 4:3), which was removed in the bridal chamber. This would account for Rebekah’s need to veil herself in the presence of Isaac, her fiancé (Gn 24:65), and also for the ease with which Laban was able to replace Rachel with Leah on Jacob’s wedding night (29:23-25).<\/p>\n<p>Symbolic ceremonies may sometimes have been included as part of the betrothal or wedding ceremonies, such as Ruth’s request that Boaz spread his skirt over her to indicate that he was taking her to wife (Ru 3:9). Another ritual may have been the ceremonial removal of the bride’s girdle by the groom in the nuptial chamber, which was a room or tent specially prepared for the newly married couple. The marriage was normally consummated on the first night (Gn 29:23; Tb 8:1), and the stained linen would be retained as evidence of the bride’s virginity.<\/p>\n<p>In a contrast to the elaborate procession and feasting of the marriage, divorce was simple. A man could divorce his wife if he found fault with her in any particular matter, and this right was not abolished until the 11th century <span>AD<\/span>. Divorce was discouraged, however, and gradually the procedure became more complex, being hedged about with a number of deterrents.<\/p>\n<p>As the laws regarding divorce became more complex, so the procedure became increasingly expensive. At a later time a lawyer, or sometimes a rabbi, would give advice, especially on such matters as the return of property rightly belonging to the bride or her family.<\/p>\n<p>If a bride was found to have committed adultery, the husband was thought to be entitled to a divorce. This was also the case if he even suspected her of infidelity. He could also divorce his wife if he felt that she had violated normal morality, had become apostate, or had been less than efficient in the management of her household. If a woman refused her husband his conjugal rights for a period of at least one year, she could be divorced. Other grounds for divorcing a wife included insulting behavior to a husband or his relatives, contracting an incurable disease, or refusing to accompany her husband when he moved the domicile to a new area.<\/p>\n<p>In general, the status of the wife was low. Despite the fact that she gave advice, managed the household, educated the young children, and worked alongside her husband when necessary, he was still her master, and her role was to obey. She was little more than a servant, although better than a slave, for she could not be sold even though she could be divorced.<\/p>\n<p>In the frequent figurative uses of marriage in the OT, the Hebrew people and God are referred to in terms of bride and bridegroom (Is 62:4-5; Jer 2:2). The desolation that is about to overtake Judah is contrasted by Jeremiah with the celebration of a wedding feast (Jer 7:34; 16:9; 25:10). Figurative forms are used again in Hosea, where God rejects the relationship with his wife, Israel (Hos 2:2), but is prepared to accept her again if she resumes her faithful practices (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, John the Baptist compares his sense of joy with that of a friend of the groom at a wedding (Jn 3:29), while Jesus himself made reference to the wedding preparations in the parable of the wise and foolish virgins (Mt 25:1-12). In the story of the marriage feast (22:1-14) Christ mentions quite incidentally the fact that wedding robes were provided for the guests at such ceremonies. The theme of the Christian church as the bride of Christ occurs in such books as 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, and Revelation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusTeachingsonMarriageandAdultery\">Jesus’ Teachings on Marriage and Adultery<\/p>\n<p>In the realm of civil law there are changes of emphasis in Jesus’ teaching over against the OT. For example, the OT did not regard infidelity by a husband as adultery against his wife. When challenged by the Jews, Jesus said that originally God had made one wife for a man; therefore, there should be no divorce (Mk 10:2-9). Further, he stated if a man does divorce his wife and marry again, he “commits adultery against her” (v 11). Thus, Jesus made man and woman equal as regards adultery. An unfaithful husband is just as adulterous as an unfaithful wife. This revolutionary teaching struck the disciples as severe (see Mt 19:10), but it illustrates what Jesus meant when he said their righteousness must be greater than that of the Jewish leaders (5:20).<\/p>\n<p>There is a slight difference in Matthew’s account of Jesus’ teaching, which has led some scholars to argue that Jesus was not quite as strict as the above summary suggests. According to Matthew 19:9, a wife’s “unchastity” (probably some sexual misconduct) allows an aggrieved husband to divorce her and marry again. If this remark concluded the passage, this interpretation would be the simplest. However, from the context it is more likely that Jesus allowed innocent spouses to separate from their wives but not to remarry. This explains why the disciples were so shocked and why Jesus went on to speak about some who refuse to marry for the sake of the kingdom of heaven (Mt 19:12). This was also the way the church interpreted the passage for the first five centuries. They allowed Christians to separate but not to remarry (cf. 1 Cor 7:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adultery; Civil Law and Justice; Concubinage, Concubines; Divorce; Family Life and Relations; Sex, Sexuality; Virgin.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS<\/h3>\n<p>The joining together of male and female in matrimony, as practiced by various cultures.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of marriage was ordained by God in his instruction to Adam that a man should leave his father and mother, and that he and his wife should be as one flesh (Gn 2:24).<\/p>\n<p>Several forms of marriage are referred to in the OT, the earliest of which seems to be based on a matrilineal principle. Although there appears to be some evidence for this in the middle Bronze Age and in the early monarchy, it is difficult to be certain about the matter, despite the importance in Egypt, and perhaps elsewhere, of the role of the mother in determining descent.<\/p>\n<p>Generally, the bride left her parents when she married and went to live with her husband’s clan, as Rebekah did (Gn 24:58-59). The phrase “to marry a wife” is from a root meaning to “become master” (Dt 21:13), and the wife frequently treated her husband as, and referred to him as, master.<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew genealogical lists indicate that descent was reckoned through the male line (Gn 5:10; 36:9-43; Nm 1:1-15; Ru 4:18-22; 1 Chr 1:1-9). The important right of naming a child, indicating power and authority over that child, was exercised almost equally between father and mother in biblical references (cf. Gn 4:1, 25-26; 5:29; 35:18; 1 Sm 1:20; 4:21; Is 8:3; Hos 1:4-9). Sons were frequently named after their fathers and were identified with them.<\/p>\n<p>The father was the authority figure in the home in a patriarchal society. His wife and children were regarded as his possessions in somewhat the same way as his fields and livestock (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21). He had the right to sell his daughters (Ex 21:7; Neh 5:5), and even had the power of life and death over his children.<\/p>\n<p>The ease with which a man could terminate a marriage by divorcing his wife also shows the measure of his authority in the family (Dt 24:1-4; cf. 22:13-21).<\/p>\n<p>A levirate marriage was instituted to preserve a family name and inheritance. When a man died, the responsibility for maintaining his widow and any children that she might have fell upon her husband’s closest male relative. The order of responsibility is set out in Deuteronomy 25:5-10. Normally, the brother of the deceased husband living with the clan was expected to enter into a levirate marriage with the widow. If she was childless, the firstborn of the new marriage was regarded as a child of the deceased. Levirate marriage was also known to the Canaanites, Assyrians, and Hittites.<\/p>\n<p>The most familiar levirate situation in the OT, although not conforming strictly to the law of Deuteronomy 25, is described in the book of Ruth. It was essential for Ruth to find some close male relative to marry her so that the family name and property could be preserved. The closest male relative declined the responsibility, feeling that it was a double imposition, first, to have to purchase the land and support Ruth, and second, to know that the first son would be regarded as her dead husband’s child, bearing his name and inheriting the land. Boaz agreed to undertake the responsibility (Ru 2:20–4:10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite numerous examples of polygamy cited in the OT, there is no doubt that the vast majority of the Israelites were monogamous. There are no examples given of large polygamous marriages in the families of commoners.<\/p>\n<p>The original instruction to Adam was that a “man . . . cleaves to his wife” (Gn 2:24). Hebrew laws generally imply that a marriage with one wife is the most acceptable form of marriage (Ex 20:17; 21:5; Lv 18:8, 16-20; 20:10; Nm 5:12; Dt 5:21). Although this seems to have become the norm by the time of the monarchy, a king such as Solomon did not follow Hebrew traditions in this matter. In the postexilic period marriages were predominantly monogamous, although they were being terminated increasingly by divorce. In the NT period monogamy seems to have been the rule, although persons such as Herod the Great were polygamous. Christ taught that marriage should last the lifetime of the partners, and if a man divorced his wife and married another woman during his previous spouse’s lifetime, he committed adultery (Mt 5:31-32).<\/p>\n<p>Marriage generally took place with those who were close to the immediate family circle, and it was imperative, therefore, that limits on acceptable consanguinity should be imposed. In patriarchal times a man could marry his half sister on his father’s side (Gn 20:12), and this continued to be the case even under David (2 Sm 13:13), although it was specifically forbidden in Leviticus 20:17. As there is some contradiction between the marriage laws of Deuteronomy and those in the Law of Holiness (Dt 25:5; Lv 18:16), it is possible that there was some modification of the stricter Levitical regulations. Marriages between cousins, such as Isaac with Rebekah, and Jacob with Rachel and Leah, were common. When a close relative was interested in marriage, it was almost impossible to refuse (Tb 6:13; 7:11-12). Moses was the offspring of a marriage between nephew and aunt (Ex 6:20; Nm 26:59), which would have been forbidden in Leviticus 18:12-13 and 20:19, as would Jacob’s marriage with two sisters at the same time (Gn 29:30).<\/p>\n<p>When the Israelites settled in Canaan, many of them married Canaanite women, much to the consternation of those who desired to maintain the purity of the Hebrew religion (1 Kgs 11:4). Such intermarriage was prohibited under Mosaic law (Ex 34:15-16; Dt 7:3-4), although many Israelites ignored these regulations and continued to indulge in mixed marriages. If a woman was captured in war and was prepared to abandon her native country, an exception could be made (Dt 21:10-14). By contrast, Samson married a Philistine woman who remained with her own people, but who received conjugal visits from her husband periodically (Jgs 14:8–15:2).<\/p>\n<p>The danger of intermarriage affecting the purity of Hebrew religion was considered so great that in the postexilic period wholesale divorce was ordered where Jews had married foreign wives (Ezr 9:2; 10:3, 16-17). The intent was that the national religion should remain pure, even though homes and families were destroyed. Even in NT times, Paul denounced marriage with non-Christians (2 Cor 6:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to estimate at what age young people married. A boy was considered to be a man by his early teens, and late in Jewish tradition this transition was celebrated by the bar mitzvah, which generally occurred when the boy was 13.<\/p>\n<p>Normally the young man’s parents chose the bride. The resulting discussion about the marriage occurred between the groom’s parents and the bride’s parents, and often neither of the young people was consulted. It was not essential for the eldest in the family to be married first (Gn 29:26). When Abraham decided that Isaac should be married, a servant was sent to choose a bride from among Abraham’s relatives in Mesopotamia. The servant made contact with the bride’s brother and mother (24:33-53), and it was only afterward that Rebekah was asked to give her consent (vv 57-58). Her father was possibly incapacitated; otherwise, it would have been unlikely that her consent would have been asked at all.<\/p>\n<p>One of the reasons why the average young man would not have been able to afford more than one wife was the practice of the bride-price, which had to be paid to the bride’s father. It was possible to substitute service for the bride-price (Gn 29:15-30), or the completion of an appointed task (1 Sm 18:25-27). A specific sum is mentioned for the bride-price in the case of a virgin who had been raped and who had to be purchased by her seducer. The price was set at 50 shekels, but this was considered to be a punishment; it is probable that the normal amount was between 10 and 320 shekels (Lv 27:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>At the time of the second temple, a virgin bride was considered to be worth 50 shekels, and a widow or divorced woman about half that sum. During this period, a virgin bride was normally married in midweek so that, if her husband found her not to be a virgin, he could bring proof to the court the following day, which would still be in advance of the Sabbath. A widow or a divorced woman normally married on the equivalent of a Thursday, giving her a full day with her husband before the Sabbath.<\/p>\n<p>Marriage was a covenant or alliance between two families. It thus united them, and by extending the kinship, the overall size of the group was increased. This was important in a society where responsibilities for relatives, however distant, were accepted unhesitatingly. The covenant concept also could have political overtones, as with the marriage between Solomon and the Egyptian princess (1 Kgs 11:1) or Ahab of Israel and Jezebel of Tyre (16:31).<\/p>\n<p>The sealing of the covenant included the transfer of gifts, which would establish the wealth and status of the donor and of the bride (Gn 34:12). In the ancient Near East, the giving of a gift was thought to include a part of the donor, so that the giver was actually offering a portion of himself. The gift that sealed the covenant also established the donor’s authority over the bride.<\/p>\n<p>The next stage in the marriage procedure was the betrothal. First mentioned in Exodus 22:16, the term is used several times in Deuteronomy (Dt 20:7; 22:23-24). The betrothal had the legal status of a marriage (Dt 28:30; 2 Sm 3:14), and anyone violating a betrothed virgin would be stoned, according to the law of Deuteronomy, for violating his neighbor’s “wife” (Dt 22:23-24). The meaning of a betrothal involved taking possession, in a manner similar to that of receiving tribute. Nevertheless, there remained a distinction between betrothing a woman and taking her as a wife (20:7). During the period of betrothal, the prospective groom was exempt from military service. It was assumed that the betrothal was a formal part of a permanent relationship (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:27; 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>A man who was to marry another’s daughter was already regarded as a son-in-law at the time of betrothal (Gn 19:14). Mary, as Joseph’s betrothed, was actually considered his wife, although he did not have intercourse with her until after the birth of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The first biblical record of a wedding being celebrated by a feast is in the story of Jacob (Gn 29:22). There was no actual marriage contract recorded until its mention in the book of Tobit (Tb 7:12). This contract was not considered valid until the couple had cohabited for a week (Gn 29:27; Jgs 14:12, 18). When Samson left his bride before the end of the seven-day period, the bride’s parents considered the marriage void and gave her to another man (Jgs 14:20).<\/p>\n<p>The wedding was an occasion of great family rejoicing. The special clothing of the bride and groom (Is 61:10; Ez 16:9-13) included for the bride a fine dress often adorned with jewels (Ps 45:14-15; Is 61:10) and other ornaments, while the bridegroom had fine clothing and wore a diadem (Sg 3:11; Is 61:10). The bride wore a veil (Gn 24:65; Sg 4:3), which was removed in the bridal chamber. This would account for Rebekah’s need to veil herself in the presence of Isaac, her fiancé (Gn 24:65), and also for the ease with which Laban was able to replace Rachel with Leah on Jacob’s wedding night (29:23-25).<\/p>\n<p>Symbolic ceremonies may sometimes have been included as part of the betrothal or wedding ceremonies, such as Ruth’s request that Boaz spread his skirt over her to indicate that he was taking her to wife (Ru 3:9). Another ritual may have been the ceremonial removal of the bride’s girdle by the groom in the nuptial chamber, which was a room or tent specially prepared for the newly married couple. The marriage was normally consummated on the first night (Gn 29:23; Tb 8:1), and the stained linen would be retained as evidence of the bride’s virginity.<\/p>\n<p>In a contrast to the elaborate procession and feasting of the marriage, divorce was simple. A man could divorce his wife if he found fault with her in any particular matter, and this right was not abolished until the 11th century <span>AD<\/span>. Divorce was discouraged, however, and gradually the procedure became more complex, being hedged about with a number of deterrents.<\/p>\n<p>As the laws regarding divorce became more complex, so the procedure became increasingly expensive. At a later time a lawyer, or sometimes a rabbi, would give advice, especially on such matters as the return of property rightly belonging to the bride or her family.<\/p>\n<p>If a bride was found to have committed adultery, the husband was thought to be entitled to a divorce. This was also the case if he even suspected her of infidelity. He could also divorce his wife if he felt that she had violated normal morality, had become apostate, or had been less than efficient in the management of her household. If a woman refused her husband his conjugal rights for a period of at least one year, she could be divorced. Other grounds for divorcing a wife included insulting behavior to a husband or his relatives, contracting an incurable disease, or refusing to accompany her husband when he moved the domicile to a new area.<\/p>\n<p>In general, the status of the wife was low. Despite the fact that she gave advice, managed the household, educated the young children, and worked alongside her husband when necessary, he was still her master, and her role was to obey. She was little more than a servant, although better than a slave, for she could not be sold even though she could be divorced.<\/p>\n<p>In the frequent figurative uses of marriage in the OT, the Hebrew people and God are referred to in terms of bride and bridegroom (Is 62:4-5; Jer 2:2). The desolation that is about to overtake Judah is contrasted by Jeremiah with the celebration of a wedding feast (Jer 7:34; 16:9; 25:10). Figurative forms are used again in Hosea, where God rejects the relationship with his wife, Israel (Hos 2:2), but is prepared to accept her again if she resumes her faithful practices (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, John the Baptist compares his sense of joy with that of a friend of the groom at a wedding (Jn 3:29), while Jesus himself made reference to the wedding preparations in the parable of the wise and foolish virgins (Mt 25:1-12). In the story of the marriage feast (22:1-14) Christ mentions quite incidentally the fact that wedding robes were provided for the guests at such ceremonies. The theme of the Christian church as the bride of Christ occurs in such books as 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, and Revelation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusTeachingsonMarriageandAdultery\">Jesus’ Teachings on Marriage and Adultery<\/p>\n<p>In the realm of civil law there are changes of emphasis in Jesus’ teaching over against the OT. For example, the OT did not regard infidelity by a husband as adultery against his wife. When challenged by the Jews, Jesus said that originally God had made one wife for a man; therefore, there should be no divorce (Mk 10:2-9). Further, he stated if a man does divorce his wife and marry again, he “commits adultery against her” (v 11). Thus, Jesus made man and woman equal as regards adultery. An unfaithful husband is just as adulterous as an unfaithful wife. This revolutionary teaching struck the disciples as severe (see Mt 19:10), but it illustrates what Jesus meant when he said their righteousness must be greater than that of the Jewish leaders (5:20).<\/p>\n<p>There is a slight difference in Matthew’s account of Jesus’ teaching, which has led some scholars to argue that Jesus was not quite as strict as the above summary suggests. According to Matthew 19:9, a wife’s “unchastity” (probably some sexual misconduct) allows an aggrieved husband to divorce her and marry again. If this remark concluded the passage, this interpretation would be the simplest. However, from the context it is more likely that Jesus allowed innocent spouses to separate from their wives but not to remarry. This explains why the disciples were so shocked and why Jesus went on to speak about some who refuse to marry for the sake of the kingdom of heaven (Mt 19:12). This was also the way the church interpreted the passage for the first five centuries. They allowed Christians to separate but not to remarry (cf. 1 Cor 7:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adultery; Civil Law and Justice; Concubinage, Concubines; Divorce; Family Life and Relations; Sex, Sexuality; Virgin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS The joining together of male and female in matrimony, as practiced by various cultures. The idea of marriage was ordained by God in his instruction to Adam that a man should leave his father and mother, and that he and his wife should be as one flesh (Gn 2:24). Several forms of marriage are referred to in the OT, the earliest of which seems to be based on a matrilineal principle. Although there appears to be some evidence for this in the middle Bronze Age and in the...","summary_en":"MARRIAGE, MARRIAGE CUSTOMS The joining together of male and female in matrimony, as practiced by various cultures. The idea of marriage was ordained by God in his instruction to Adam that a man should leave his father and mother, and that he and his wife should be as one flesh (Gn 2:24). Several forms of marriage are referred to in the OT, the earliest of which seems to be based on a matrilineal principle. Although there appears to be some evidence for this in the middle Bronze Age and in the...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":29591,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Perezite Perez","title_en":"Perezite Perez","content_ro":"<h3>PEREZ, PEREZITE<\/h3>\n<p>Son of Judah whose name is derived from a Hebrew word meaning “he who bursts forth”; his name refers to the manner in which he unexpectedly came first from Tamar’s womb before his twin brother, Zerah (Gn 38:29). He fathered two sons, Hezron and Hamul, and became the ancestral head of the Perezite family (Gn 46:12; Nm 26:20-21; 1 Chr 2:4-5; 4:1). The <span>kjv<\/span> and the Apocrypha translate the name variously as Pharez, Phares, and Pharzite.<\/p>\n<p>Through the descent of his son Hezron, he became the ancestor of David and Jesus Christ (Ru 4:18-22; Mt 1:3; Lk 3:33). The esteem this clan enjoyed in the tribe of Judah is evidenced by the blessing pronounced upon it by the men of Bethlehem (Ru 4:12). A descendant named Jashobeam commanded David’s captains for the first month of each year (1 Chr 27:2-3). Upon the return from captivity in Babylon, 468 Perezites were chosen to live in Jerusalem (1 Chr 9:4; Neh 11:4-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PEREZ, PEREZITE<\/h3>\n<p>Son of Judah whose name is derived from a Hebrew word meaning “he who bursts forth”; his name refers to the manner in which he unexpectedly came first from Tamar’s womb before his twin brother, Zerah (Gn 38:29). He fathered two sons, Hezron and Hamul, and became the ancestral head of the Perezite family (Gn 46:12; Nm 26:20-21; 1 Chr 2:4-5; 4:1). The <span>kjv<\/span> and the Apocrypha translate the name variously as Pharez, Phares, and Pharzite.<\/p>\n<p>Through the descent of his son Hezron, he became the ancestor of David and Jesus Christ (Ru 4:18-22; Mt 1:3; Lk 3:33). The esteem this clan enjoyed in the tribe of Judah is evidenced by the blessing pronounced upon it by the men of Bethlehem (Ru 4:12). A descendant named Jashobeam commanded David’s captains for the first month of each year (1 Chr 27:2-3). Upon the return from captivity in Babylon, 468 Perezites were chosen to live in Jerusalem (1 Chr 9:4; Neh 11:4-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"PEREZ, PEREZITE Son of Judah whose name is derived from a Hebrew word meaning “he who bursts forth”; his name refers to the manner in which he unexpectedly came first from Tamar’s womb before his twin brother, Zerah (Gn 38:29). He fathered two sons, Hezron and Hamul, and became the ancestral head of the Perezite family (Gn 46:12; Nm 26:20-21; 1 Chr 2:4-5; 4:1). The kjv and the Apocrypha translate the name variously as Pharez, Phares, and Pharzite. Through the descent of his son Hezron, he bec...","summary_en":"PEREZ, PEREZITE Son of Judah whose name is derived from a Hebrew word meaning “he who bursts forth”; his name refers to the manner in which he unexpectedly came first from Tamar’s womb before his twin brother, Zerah (Gn 38:29). He fathered two sons, Hezron and Hamul, and became the ancestral head of the Perezite family (Gn 46:12; Nm 26:20-21; 1 Chr 2:4-5; 4:1). The kjv and the Apocrypha translate the name variously as Pharez, Phares, and Pharzite. Through the descent of his son Hezron, he bec...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33377,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Ruth","title_en":"Book of Ruth","content_ro":"<h3>RUTH, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p>• Message<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>The author of the book is unknown. The question of authorship has particular connection with the date of writing, and a few clues provide at least an educated guess. The book must have been written sometime after the beginning of David’s reign. The information in Ruth 4:18-22, which pertains to the historical significance of Ruth as David’s great-grandmother, bears this out. Since foreign marriages were not approved in the book of Ruth, it scarcely could have been written during the period in which Solomon began his policy of foreign marriages. Also, David’s close friendship with Moab might have prompted someone in his kingdom to write the book, thus presenting objective rationale for David’s actions (see 1 Sm 22:3-5). Consequently, the author may have been someone close to David, possibly Samuel, Nathan, or Abiathar.<\/p>\n<p>The time of the narrative is indicated by the opening statement: “In the days when the judges ruled. . . .” The dates of the judges probably comprise a period of about 300 years, beginning with the judgeship of Othniel and concluding with that of Samson, though Samuel also served as a judge. If the genealogical information is complete in Ruth 4:18-22, the events took place during the life of David’s great-grandfather and mark the birth of his grandfather. Allowing a 35-year generation span, the events would have taken place somewhere about the turn of the 11th century <span>BC<\/span>, or about 100 years before David’s birth.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The book’s purpose is closely related to its date of composition. Assuming an early date, that is, one close to David’s lifetime, its principal thrust must be the authentication of the Davidic line. The book may be considered as a justification for including the godly Moabitess in the nation of Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Introduction (1:1-5)<\/h5>\n<p>Driven by famine, Elimelech, with his wife, Naomi, and his two sons, Mahlon and Chilion, cross the Jordan to stay for a period of time in Moab, where there is sufficient provision. The two sons, after marrying Moabite women, die, and their father dies as well. Naomi is left a widow, with two foreign daughters-in-law.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Return to Bethlehem (1:6-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Hearing reports from Bethlehem that the famine has ended, Naomi makes preparations to return. Both of her daughters-in-law, Orpah and Ruth, accompany her for at least a portion of the journey. Probably thinking of the problems they might encounter as foreigners in Judah, Naomi strongly urges the girls to stay in their own land. Both of the young widows refuse, but Naomi presents the facts. First, she is not pregnant, so the chance of a younger brother fulfilling the levirate responsibility is not imminent. Second, she has no prospects of remarriage and consequently no prospect of further children. Then she also notes that even if the first two conditions were met immediately, the possibility of their waiting was impossible. Orpah is persuaded and kisses her mother-in-law good-bye.<\/p>\n<p>But Ruth “clung to her” (1:18). The verb, having the connotation of being glued to something, is the same verb used of marriage (Gn 2:24). Ruth demonstrated her serious intentions by making five commitments (Ru 1:16-17). In essence, Ruth renounced her former life in order to gain a life that she considered of greater value. She decided to follow the God of Israel and his laws. Ruth’s appeal to the God of Israel was more than equal to Naomi’s pleas, and the two of them returned together.<\/p>\n<p>Their arrival in Bethlehem was traumatic for Naomi. Having left Bethlehem with a husband and two sons, she returned empty. She told her friends to call her “Mara” (bitter). But she had returned at a propitious time, the beginning of the harvest season.<\/p>\n<h5>Reaping in the Fields of Boaz (2:1-23)<\/h5>\n<p>The first verse of the chapter provides the setting for the narrative that follows by introducing Boaz, a wealthy relative of Elimelech.<\/p>\n<p>In the second verse, Ruth volunteered to glean the fields by following the reapers and picking up the small amounts left behind. Gleaners were also permitted to harvest the grain in the corners of the fields—a provision for the poor contained in the law (Lv 19:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Ruth happened to come to the field of Boaz. When he visited this field, he noticed Ruth, inquired about her, and learned her identity. His overseer reported that she had industriously worked the fields from early morning until that time. Boaz, attracted to her because of her loyalty and concern for Naomi, graciously made additional provisions for her. She was given a favored position in reaping, directly behind the main body of reapers. Further, she was to receive water that had been drawn for her by the young men—an unorthodox arrangement.<\/p>\n<p>Ruth, falling before Boaz in a gesture of great humility and respect, asked why she—as a foreigner—should receive such favor. Boaz gave two reasons: her kindness to her mother-in-law, and her spiritual insight, which led her to seek after Israel’s God, “under whose wings you have come to take refuge” (Ru 2:12, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>She was also given a place at the reapers’ table and, upon Boaz’s orders, returned to the fields, this time to reap from the unharvested grain. At the end of the day she returned home to Naomi and told her of the day’s events. Naomi informed Ruth that Boaz had the right of redemption (see discussion below). Ruth returned to his fields until the end of the harvest season.<\/p>\n<h5>Relying upon the Kinsman (3:1-18)<\/h5>\n<p>Naomi advised Ruth to approach Boaz as a <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span><em>,<\/em> or kinsman-redeemer. The plan suggested by Naomi seems peculiar, yet some thoughts may give a certain coloring to it. (1) Naomi seems to have believed that Boaz was the nearest kinsman, being ignorant of the yet nearer one (3:12). Consequently, according to Israelite law (Dt 25:5ff.), it would be the duty of Boaz to marry Ruth to produce offspring, since her husband died. (2) The general presentation of Naomi’s character in this book is that of a God-fearing woman. It is certain that, however curious in its external form, there can be nothing counseled here that is repugnant to God’s law or shocking to a virtuous man such as Boaz. Otherwise, Naomi would have been frustrating her own purpose.<\/p>\n<p>Boaz’s response to Ruth’s actions demonstrated his gentlemanly concerns for her. He explained to her that he was not the nearest kinsman but promised that he would take care of the necessary procedures the next day. Protecting her reputation, Boaz sent her home before daylight. Naomi predicted that Boaz would settle the matter that very day.<\/p>\n<h5>Redeeming the Inheritance (4:1-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Boaz went to the place of business, the city gate. The city gate area comprised the forum where the public affairs of the city were discussed. Boaz indicated that he wished to discuss a matter of business with the nearer kinsman. Ten of the city elders acted as witnesses. The first matter at hand was to deal with the issue of property. Boaz asked this nearer kinsman if he was willing to acquire property for Naomi. This is stated in the traditional stipulation: “Your purchase of the land from Naomi also requires that you marry Ruth, the Moabite widow” (4:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). The nearer kinsman was unwilling to marry Ruth because this would inevitably cost him some financial loss, since he would have to divide his own property with any son of his born to Ruth. Thus he relinquished his rights by the custom of taking off his shoe. (The shoe was symbolic of the land rights that belonged to the inheritance.) So Boaz took the part of being the kinsman-redeemer. The marriage of Boaz and Ruth produced a son who, under Israel’s laws, was reckoned as Naomi’s child and heir.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Message\">Message<\/p>\n<p>First, the book of Ruth traces the lineage of Ruth to David. The completion of that line is in Matthew 1 and finds its fulfillment in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A second teaching is the beauty of God’s grace. A foreigner, even a Moabitess, can be linked with Israel’s blessing.<\/p>\n<p>Theologically, the concept of kinsman-redeemer as a type of Messiah is clearly evident. He must be a blood relative, have the ability to purchase, be willing to buy the inheritance, and be willing to marry the widow of the deceased kinsman.<\/p>\n<p>And finally, the love that Ruth showed to Naomi provides a pattern of devotion. The women of Bethlehem told Naomi, “Your daughter-in-law . . . loves you so much and [is] better to you than seven sons!” (4:15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RUTH, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p>• Message<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorandDate\">Author and Date<\/p>\n<p>The author of the book is unknown. The question of authorship has particular connection with the date of writing, and a few clues provide at least an educated guess. The book must have been written sometime after the beginning of David’s reign. The information in Ruth 4:18-22, which pertains to the historical significance of Ruth as David’s great-grandmother, bears this out. Since foreign marriages were not approved in the book of Ruth, it scarcely could have been written during the period in which Solomon began his policy of foreign marriages. Also, David’s close friendship with Moab might have prompted someone in his kingdom to write the book, thus presenting objective rationale for David’s actions (see 1 Sm 22:3-5). Consequently, the author may have been someone close to David, possibly Samuel, Nathan, or Abiathar.<\/p>\n<p>The time of the narrative is indicated by the opening statement: “In the days when the judges ruled. . . .” The dates of the judges probably comprise a period of about 300 years, beginning with the judgeship of Othniel and concluding with that of Samson, though Samuel also served as a judge. If the genealogical information is complete in Ruth 4:18-22, the events took place during the life of David’s great-grandfather and mark the birth of his grandfather. Allowing a 35-year generation span, the events would have taken place somewhere about the turn of the 11th century <span>BC<\/span>, or about 100 years before David’s birth.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The book’s purpose is closely related to its date of composition. Assuming an early date, that is, one close to David’s lifetime, its principal thrust must be the authentication of the Davidic line. The book may be considered as a justification for including the godly Moabitess in the nation of Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>Introduction (1:1-5)<\/h5>\n<p>Driven by famine, Elimelech, with his wife, Naomi, and his two sons, Mahlon and Chilion, cross the Jordan to stay for a period of time in Moab, where there is sufficient provision. The two sons, after marrying Moabite women, die, and their father dies as well. Naomi is left a widow, with two foreign daughters-in-law.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Return to Bethlehem (1:6-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Hearing reports from Bethlehem that the famine has ended, Naomi makes preparations to return. Both of her daughters-in-law, Orpah and Ruth, accompany her for at least a portion of the journey. Probably thinking of the problems they might encounter as foreigners in Judah, Naomi strongly urges the girls to stay in their own land. Both of the young widows refuse, but Naomi presents the facts. First, she is not pregnant, so the chance of a younger brother fulfilling the levirate responsibility is not imminent. Second, she has no prospects of remarriage and consequently no prospect of further children. Then she also notes that even if the first two conditions were met immediately, the possibility of their waiting was impossible. Orpah is persuaded and kisses her mother-in-law good-bye.<\/p>\n<p>But Ruth “clung to her” (1:18). The verb, having the connotation of being glued to something, is the same verb used of marriage (Gn 2:24). Ruth demonstrated her serious intentions by making five commitments (Ru 1:16-17). In essence, Ruth renounced her former life in order to gain a life that she considered of greater value. She decided to follow the God of Israel and his laws. Ruth’s appeal to the God of Israel was more than equal to Naomi’s pleas, and the two of them returned together.<\/p>\n<p>Their arrival in Bethlehem was traumatic for Naomi. Having left Bethlehem with a husband and two sons, she returned empty. She told her friends to call her “Mara” (bitter). But she had returned at a propitious time, the beginning of the harvest season.<\/p>\n<h5>Reaping in the Fields of Boaz (2:1-23)<\/h5>\n<p>The first verse of the chapter provides the setting for the narrative that follows by introducing Boaz, a wealthy relative of Elimelech.<\/p>\n<p>In the second verse, Ruth volunteered to glean the fields by following the reapers and picking up the small amounts left behind. Gleaners were also permitted to harvest the grain in the corners of the fields—a provision for the poor contained in the law (Lv 19:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Ruth happened to come to the field of Boaz. When he visited this field, he noticed Ruth, inquired about her, and learned her identity. His overseer reported that she had industriously worked the fields from early morning until that time. Boaz, attracted to her because of her loyalty and concern for Naomi, graciously made additional provisions for her. She was given a favored position in reaping, directly behind the main body of reapers. Further, she was to receive water that had been drawn for her by the young men—an unorthodox arrangement.<\/p>\n<p>Ruth, falling before Boaz in a gesture of great humility and respect, asked why she—as a foreigner—should receive such favor. Boaz gave two reasons: her kindness to her mother-in-law, and her spiritual insight, which led her to seek after Israel’s God, “under whose wings you have come to take refuge” (Ru 2:12, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>She was also given a place at the reapers’ table and, upon Boaz’s orders, returned to the fields, this time to reap from the unharvested grain. At the end of the day she returned home to Naomi and told her of the day’s events. Naomi informed Ruth that Boaz had the right of redemption (see discussion below). Ruth returned to his fields until the end of the harvest season.<\/p>\n<h5>Relying upon the Kinsman (3:1-18)<\/h5>\n<p>Naomi advised Ruth to approach Boaz as a <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span><em>,<\/em> or kinsman-redeemer. The plan suggested by Naomi seems peculiar, yet some thoughts may give a certain coloring to it. (1) Naomi seems to have believed that Boaz was the nearest kinsman, being ignorant of the yet nearer one (3:12). Consequently, according to Israelite law (Dt 25:5ff.), it would be the duty of Boaz to marry Ruth to produce offspring, since her husband died. (2) The general presentation of Naomi’s character in this book is that of a God-fearing woman. It is certain that, however curious in its external form, there can be nothing counseled here that is repugnant to God’s law or shocking to a virtuous man such as Boaz. Otherwise, Naomi would have been frustrating her own purpose.<\/p>\n<p>Boaz’s response to Ruth’s actions demonstrated his gentlemanly concerns for her. He explained to her that he was not the nearest kinsman but promised that he would take care of the necessary procedures the next day. Protecting her reputation, Boaz sent her home before daylight. Naomi predicted that Boaz would settle the matter that very day.<\/p>\n<h5>Redeeming the Inheritance (4:1-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Boaz went to the place of business, the city gate. The city gate area comprised the forum where the public affairs of the city were discussed. Boaz indicated that he wished to discuss a matter of business with the nearer kinsman. Ten of the city elders acted as witnesses. The first matter at hand was to deal with the issue of property. Boaz asked this nearer kinsman if he was willing to acquire property for Naomi. This is stated in the traditional stipulation: “Your purchase of the land from Naomi also requires that you marry Ruth, the Moabite widow” (4:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). The nearer kinsman was unwilling to marry Ruth because this would inevitably cost him some financial loss, since he would have to divide his own property with any son of his born to Ruth. Thus he relinquished his rights by the custom of taking off his shoe. (The shoe was symbolic of the land rights that belonged to the inheritance.) So Boaz took the part of being the kinsman-redeemer. The marriage of Boaz and Ruth produced a son who, under Israel’s laws, was reckoned as Naomi’s child and heir.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Message\">Message<\/p>\n<p>First, the book of Ruth traces the lineage of Ruth to David. The completion of that line is in Matthew 1 and finds its fulfillment in Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>A second teaching is the beauty of God’s grace. A foreigner, even a Moabitess, can be linked with Israel’s blessing.<\/p>\n<p>Theologically, the concept of kinsman-redeemer as a type of Messiah is clearly evident. He must be a blood relative, have the ability to purchase, be willing to buy the inheritance, and be willing to marry the widow of the deceased kinsman.<\/p>\n<p>And finally, the love that Ruth showed to Naomi provides a pattern of devotion. The women of Bethlehem told Naomi, “Your daughter-in-law . . . loves you so much and [is] better to you than seven sons!” (4:15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"RUTH, Book of Preview • Author and Date • Purpose • Content • Message Author and Date The author of the book is unknown. The question of authorship has particular connection with the date of writing, and a few clues provide at least an educated guess. The book must have been written sometime after the beginning of David’s reign. The information in Ruth 4:18-22, which pertains to the historical significance of Ruth as David’s great-grandmother, bears this out. Since foreign marriages were not ...","summary_en":"RUTH, Book of Preview • Author and Date • Purpose • Content • Message Author and Date The author of the book is unknown. The question of authorship has particular connection with the date of writing, and a few clues provide at least an educated guess. The book must have been written sometime after the beginning of David’s reign. The information in Ruth 4:18-22, which pertains to the historical significance of Ruth as David’s great-grandmother, bears this out. Since foreign marriages were not ...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":46029,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:18","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:18-22<\/strong> The book of Ruth ends with a genealogy of ten generations, from Perez, the son of Judah (Jacob’s son), to David, the grandson of Obed. Besides being one of the world’s great stories, this tale concerns the family history of David, Israel’s greatest king. That Ruth and Boaz were ancestors of Israel’s greatest king is a major reason for the inclusion of this small book in the Old Testament.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:18-22<\/strong> The book of Ruth ends with a genealogy of ten generations, from Perez, the son of Judah (Jacob’s son), to David, the grandson of Obed. Besides being one of the world’s great stories, this tale concerns the family history of David, Israel’s greatest king. That Ruth and Boaz were ancestors of Israel’s greatest king is a major reason for the inclusion of this small book in the Old Testament.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:18-22 The book of Ruth ends with a genealogy of ten generations, from Perez, the son of Judah (Jacob’s son), to David, the grandson of Obed. Besides being one of the world’s great stories, this tale concerns the family history of David, Israel’s greatest king. That Ruth and Boaz were ancestors of Israel’s greatest king is a major reason for the inclusion of this small book in the Old Testament.","summary_en":"4:18-22 The book of Ruth ends with a genealogy of ten generations, from Perez, the son of Judah (Jacob’s son), to David, the grandson of Obed. Besides being one of the world’s great stories, this tale concerns the family history of David, Israel’s greatest king. That Ruth and Boaz were ancestors of Israel’s greatest king is a major reason for the inclusion of this small book in the Old Testament.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":73655,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:18","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:18-22<\/strong> The book of Ruth ends with a genealogy of ten generations, from Perez, the son of Judah (Jacob’s son), to David, the grandson of Obed. Besides being one of the world’s great stories, this tale concerns the family history of David, Israel’s greatest king. That Ruth and Boaz were ancestors of Israel’s greatest king is a major reason for the inclusion of this small book in the Old Testament.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:18-22<\/strong> The book of Ruth ends with a genealogy of ten generations, from Perez, the son of Judah (Jacob’s son), to David, the grandson of Obed. Besides being one of the world’s great stories, this tale concerns the family history of David, Israel’s greatest king. That Ruth and Boaz were ancestors of Israel’s greatest king is a major reason for the inclusion of this small book in the Old Testament.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:18-22 The book of Ruth ends with a genealogy of ten generations, from Perez, the son of Judah (Jacob’s son), to David, the grandson of Obed. Besides being one of the world’s great stories, this tale concerns the family history of David, Israel’s greatest king. That Ruth and Boaz were ancestors of Israel’s greatest king is a major reason for the inclusion of this small book in the Old Testament.","summary_en":"4:18-22 The book of Ruth ends with a genealogy of ten generations, from Perez, the son of Judah (Jacob’s son), to David, the grandson of Obed. Besides being one of the world’s great stories, this tale concerns the family history of David, Israel’s greatest king. That Ruth and Boaz were ancestors of Israel’s greatest king is a major reason for the inclusion of this small book in the Old Testament.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":101281,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:18","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:18-22<\/strong> The book of Ruth ends with a genealogy of ten generations, from Perez, the son of Judah (Jacob’s son), to David, the grandson of Obed. Besides being one of the world’s great stories, this tale concerns the family history of David, Israel’s greatest king. That Ruth and Boaz were ancestors of Israel’s greatest king is a major reason for the inclusion of this small book in the Old Testament.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:18-22<\/strong> The book of Ruth ends with a genealogy of ten generations, from Perez, the son of Judah (Jacob’s son), to David, the grandson of Obed. Besides being one of the world’s great stories, this tale concerns the family history of David, Israel’s greatest king. That Ruth and Boaz were ancestors of Israel’s greatest king is a major reason for the inclusion of this small book in the Old Testament.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:18-22 The book of Ruth ends with a genealogy of ten generations, from Perez, the son of Judah (Jacob’s son), to David, the grandson of Obed. Besides being one of the world’s great stories, this tale concerns the family history of David, Israel’s greatest king. That Ruth and Boaz were ancestors of Israel’s greatest king is a major reason for the inclusion of this small book in the Old Testament.","summary_en":"4:18-22 The book of Ruth ends with a genealogy of ten generations, from Perez, the son of Judah (Jacob’s son), to David, the grandson of Obed. Besides being one of the world’s great stories, this tale concerns the family history of David, Israel’s greatest king. That Ruth and Boaz were ancestors of Israel’s greatest king is a major reason for the inclusion of this small book in the Old Testament.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":128907,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Rut 4:18","title_en":"Study Note: Rut 4:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>4:18-22<\/strong> The book of Ruth ends with a genealogy of ten generations, from Perez, the son of Judah (Jacob’s son), to David, the grandson of Obed. Besides being one of the world’s great stories, this tale concerns the family history of David, Israel’s greatest king. That Ruth and Boaz were ancestors of Israel’s greatest king is a major reason for the inclusion of this small book in the Old Testament.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>4:18-22<\/strong> The book of Ruth ends with a genealogy of ten generations, from Perez, the son of Judah (Jacob’s son), to David, the grandson of Obed. Besides being one of the world’s great stories, this tale concerns the family history of David, Israel’s greatest king. That Ruth and Boaz were ancestors of Israel’s greatest king is a major reason for the inclusion of this small book in the Old Testament.<\/p>","summary_ro":"4:18-22 The book of Ruth ends with a genealogy of ten generations, from Perez, the son of Judah (Jacob’s son), to David, the grandson of Obed. Besides being one of the world’s great stories, this tale concerns the family history of David, Israel’s greatest king. That Ruth and Boaz were ancestors of Israel’s greatest king is a major reason for the inclusion of this small book in the Old Testament.","summary_en":"4:18-22 The book of Ruth ends with a genealogy of ten generations, from Perez, the son of Judah (Jacob’s son), to David, the grandson of Obed. Besides being one of the world’s great stories, this tale concerns the family history of David, Israel’s greatest king. That Ruth and Boaz were ancestors of Israel’s greatest king is a major reason for the inclusion of this small book in the Old Testament.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":2502,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Aram (Person)","title_en":"Aram (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>ARAM (P<span>erson)<\/span><\/h3>\n<li>1. Shem’s son and Noah’s grandson (Gn 10:22-23; 1 Chr 1:17). Ancestor of the Arameans. <em>See<\/em> Syria, Syrians.<\/li>\n<li>2. Kemuel’s son, grandson of Abraham’s brother Nahor (Gn 22:21).<\/li>\n<li>3. Shemer’s son from Asher’s tribe (1 Chr 7:34).<\/li>\n<li>4. The Aram occurring in the genealogy of Jesus Christ (Mt 1:3-4, <span>kjv<\/span>) is a mistranslation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Aram<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “Ram”—an entirely different name (Ru 4:19). <em>See<\/em> Ram (Person) #1.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>ARAM (P<span>erson)<\/span><\/h3>\n<li>1. Shem’s son and Noah’s grandson (Gn 10:22-23; 1 Chr 1:17). Ancestor of the Arameans. <em>See<\/em> Syria, Syrians.<\/li>\n<li>2. Kemuel’s son, grandson of Abraham’s brother Nahor (Gn 22:21).<\/li>\n<li>3. Shemer’s son from Asher’s tribe (1 Chr 7:34).<\/li>\n<li>4. The Aram occurring in the genealogy of Jesus Christ (Mt 1:3-4, <span>kjv<\/span>) is a mistranslation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Aram<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “Ram”—an entirely different name (Ru 4:19). <em>See<\/em> Ram (Person) #1.<\/li>","summary_ro":"ARAM (Person) 1. Shem’s son and Noah’s grandson (Gn 10:22-23; 1 Chr 1:17). Ancestor of the Arameans. See Syria, Syrians. 2. Kemuel’s son, grandson of Abraham’s brother Nahor (Gn 22:21). 3. Shemer’s son from Asher’s tribe (1 Chr 7:34). 4. The Aram occurring in the genealogy of Jesus Christ (Mt 1:3-4, kjv) is a mistranslation of the Greek word Aram, meaning “Ram”—an entirely different name (Ru 4:19). See Ram (Person) #1.","summary_en":"ARAM (Person) 1. Shem’s son and Noah’s grandson (Gn 10:22-23; 1 Chr 1:17). Ancestor of the Arameans. See Syria, Syrians. 2. Kemuel’s son, grandson of Abraham’s brother Nahor (Gn 22:21). 3. Shemer’s son from Asher’s tribe (1 Chr 7:34). 4. The Aram occurring in the genealogy of Jesus Christ (Mt 1:3-4, kjv) is a mistranslation of the Greek word Aram, meaning “Ram”—an entirely different name (Ru 4:19). See Ram (Person) #1.","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":2753,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Arni","title_en":"Arni","content_ro":"<h3>ARNI<\/h3>\n<p>Ancestor of Jesus according to Luke’s genealogy (3:33); also called Ram in Ruth 4:19 and 1 Chronicles 2:9-10.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ARNI<\/h3>\n<p>Ancestor of Jesus according to Luke’s genealogy (3:33); also called Ram in Ruth 4:19 and 1 Chronicles 2:9-10.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ARNI Ancestor of Jesus according to Luke’s genealogy (3:33); also called Ram in Ruth 4:19 and 1 Chronicles 2:9-10.","summary_en":"ARNI Ancestor of Jesus according to Luke’s genealogy (3:33); also called Ram in Ruth 4:19 and 1 Chronicles 2:9-10.","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32346,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ram (Person)","title_en":"Ram (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>RAM (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Ancestor of King David (Ru 4:19; 1 Chr 2:9-10), listed in Matthew’s genealogy of Christ (Mt 1:3-4; called Arni in Lk 3:33). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>\n<li>2. Jerahmeel’s eldest son (1 Chr 2:25-27), and perhaps the nephew of #1 above.<\/li>\n<li>3. Head of the family of Elihu, one of Job’s friends (Jb 32:2).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>RAM (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Ancestor of King David (Ru 4:19; 1 Chr 2:9-10), listed in Matthew’s genealogy of Christ (Mt 1:3-4; called Arni in Lk 3:33). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>\n<li>2. Jerahmeel’s eldest son (1 Chr 2:25-27), and perhaps the nephew of #1 above.<\/li>\n<li>3. Head of the family of Elihu, one of Job’s friends (Jb 32:2).<\/li>","summary_ro":"RAM (Person) 1. Ancestor of King David (Ru 4:19; 1 Chr 2:9-10), listed in Matthew’s genealogy of Christ (Mt 1:3-4; called Arni in Lk 3:33). See Genealogy of Jesus Christ. 2. Jerahmeel’s eldest son (1 Chr 2:25-27), and perhaps the nephew of #1 above. 3. Head of the family of Elihu, one of Job’s friends (Jb 32:2).","summary_en":"RAM (Person) 1. Ancestor of King David (Ru 4:19; 1 Chr 2:9-10), listed in Matthew’s genealogy of Christ (Mt 1:3-4; called Arni in Lk 3:33). See Genealogy of Jesus Christ. 2. Jerahmeel’s eldest son (1 Chr 2:25-27), and perhaps the nephew of #1 above. 3. Head of the family of Elihu, one of Job’s friends (Jb 32:2).","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"20":[{"id":26870,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Nahshon","title_en":"Nahshon","content_ro":"<h3>NAHSHON<\/h3>\n<p>Amminadab’s son; brother of Elisheba and Salmon’s father (Ex 6:23; 1 Chr 2:10-11). Nahshon, the prince of Judah’s tribe at the start of Israel’s wilderness wanderings (Nm 1:7; 2:3; 10:14), represented his kinsmen at the altar’s dedication (7:12). In Ruth 4:20 he is listed as David’s forefather and a descendant of Judah through the line of Perez, and in Matthew and Luke’s genealogies as an ancestor of Jesus Christ (Mt 1:4; Lk 3:32).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NAHSHON<\/h3>\n<p>Amminadab’s son; brother of Elisheba and Salmon’s father (Ex 6:23; 1 Chr 2:10-11). Nahshon, the prince of Judah’s tribe at the start of Israel’s wilderness wanderings (Nm 1:7; 2:3; 10:14), represented his kinsmen at the altar’s dedication (7:12). In Ruth 4:20 he is listed as David’s forefather and a descendant of Judah through the line of Perez, and in Matthew and Luke’s genealogies as an ancestor of Jesus Christ (Mt 1:4; Lk 3:32).<\/p>","summary_ro":"NAHSHON Amminadab’s son; brother of Elisheba and Salmon’s father (Ex 6:23; 1 Chr 2:10-11). Nahshon, the prince of Judah’s tribe at the start of Israel’s wilderness wanderings (Nm 1:7; 2:3; 10:14), represented his kinsmen at the altar’s dedication (7:12). In Ruth 4:20 he is listed as David’s forefather and a descendant of Judah through the line of Perez, and in Matthew and Luke’s genealogies as an ancestor of Jesus Christ (Mt 1:4; Lk 3:32).","summary_en":"NAHSHON Amminadab’s son; brother of Elisheba and Salmon’s father (Ex 6:23; 1 Chr 2:10-11). Nahshon, the prince of Judah’s tribe at the start of Israel’s wilderness wanderings (Nm 1:7; 2:3; 10:14), represented his kinsmen at the altar’s dedication (7:12). In Ruth 4:20 he is listed as David’s forefather and a descendant of Judah through the line of Perez, and in Matthew and Luke’s genealogies as an ancestor of Jesus Christ (Mt 1:4; Lk 3:32).","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33564,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Salmon (Person)","title_en":"Salmon (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>SALMON (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>Nahshon’s son and an ancestor of David from Judah’s tribe (1 Chr 2:11). Salmon fathered Boaz by Rahab (Ru 4:20-21) and is listed in Matthew’s genealogy as a forefather of Jesus Christ (Mt 1:4-5); in the Greek his name is spelled Sala in Luke’s genealogy (Lk 3:32).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SALMON (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>Nahshon’s son and an ancestor of David from Judah’s tribe (1 Chr 2:11). Salmon fathered Boaz by Rahab (Ru 4:20-21) and is listed in Matthew’s genealogy as a forefather of Jesus Christ (Mt 1:4-5); in the Greek his name is spelled Sala in Luke’s genealogy (Lk 3:32).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SALMON (Person) Nahshon’s son and an ancestor of David from Judah’s tribe (1 Chr 2:11). Salmon fathered Boaz by Rahab (Ru 4:20-21) and is listed in Matthew’s genealogy as a forefather of Jesus Christ (Mt 1:4-5); in the Greek his name is spelled Sala in Luke’s genealogy (Lk 3:32). See also Genealogy of Jesus Christ.","summary_en":"SALMON (Person) Nahshon’s son and an ancestor of David from Judah’s tribe (1 Chr 2:11). Salmon fathered Boaz by Rahab (Ru 4:20-21) and is listed in Matthew’s genealogy as a forefather of Jesus Christ (Mt 1:4-5); in the Greek his name is spelled Sala in Luke’s genealogy (Lk 3:32). See also Genealogy of Jesus Christ.","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"21":[{"id":41105,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Rahab","title_en":"Rahab","content_ro":"<h3>Rahab<\/h3>\n<p>Rahab, a prostitute and a woman of faith, remains enigmatic centuries after her brief appearance in Israel’s history. Because she placed her faith in Israel’s God and helped the two Israelite scouts who came to her house, her life was spared when Israel captured Jericho.<\/p> \n<p>Because Rahab’s house stood on the wall of the city, Joshua’s scouts went there when they entered Jericho. Rahab might have been an innkeeper as well as a prostitute; other documents from the Old Testament era record women innkeepers who were also prostitutes. If Rahab’s house was in fact an inn, it would have been a reasonable destination; Joshua’s scouts could hope they would not attract unwanted attention.<\/p>\n<p>Rahab’s arrangement with the scouts was a stirring declaration of faith in Yahweh, Israel’s God (Josh 2:8-21). As a Canaanite woman, Rahab would have practiced the fertility cult of Baal, god of the storm and life-giving rain, and of his consort Asherah, the mother earth goddess. Yet based on reports of Israel’s progress toward her land, Rahab recognized that Yahweh, the God of Israel, is “the supreme God of the heavens above and the earth below” (2:11).<\/p>\n<p>After Joshua’s conquest of Jericho, Rahab married Salmon of the tribe of Judah; she gave birth to a son, whom they named Boaz (Ruth 4:21; Matt 1:5). Thus, Rahab was the mother-in-law of Ruth, another foreign woman adopted into Israel. Rahab was also King David’s great-great-grandmother. She is listed with Moses, David, Samson, and Samuel as an example of faith demonstrated by good deeds (Heb 11:31; Jas 2:25). She is one of five women (including Mary) mentioned in Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus, the human family tree of God’s Son (Matt 1:5). Rahab bears especially poignant witness to the breathtaking scope of God’s grace.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 2:1-21; 6:17, 22-25; Matt 1:5; Heb 11:31; Jas 2:25<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Rahab<\/h3>\n<p>Rahab, a prostitute and a woman of faith, remains enigmatic centuries after her brief appearance in Israel’s history. Because she placed her faith in Israel’s God and helped the two Israelite scouts who came to her house, her life was spared when Israel captured Jericho.<\/p> \n<p>Because Rahab’s house stood on the wall of the city, Joshua’s scouts went there when they entered Jericho. Rahab might have been an innkeeper as well as a prostitute; other documents from the Old Testament era record women innkeepers who were also prostitutes. If Rahab’s house was in fact an inn, it would have been a reasonable destination; Joshua’s scouts could hope they would not attract unwanted attention.<\/p>\n<p>Rahab’s arrangement with the scouts was a stirring declaration of faith in Yahweh, Israel’s God (Josh 2:8-21). As a Canaanite woman, Rahab would have practiced the fertility cult of Baal, god of the storm and life-giving rain, and of his consort Asherah, the mother earth goddess. Yet based on reports of Israel’s progress toward her land, Rahab recognized that Yahweh, the God of Israel, is “the supreme God of the heavens above and the earth below” (2:11).<\/p>\n<p>After Joshua’s conquest of Jericho, Rahab married Salmon of the tribe of Judah; she gave birth to a son, whom they named Boaz (Ruth 4:21; Matt 1:5). Thus, Rahab was the mother-in-law of Ruth, another foreign woman adopted into Israel. Rahab was also King David’s great-great-grandmother. She is listed with Moses, David, Samson, and Samuel as an example of faith demonstrated by good deeds (Heb 11:31; Jas 2:25). She is one of five women (including Mary) mentioned in Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus, the human family tree of God’s Son (Matt 1:5). Rahab bears especially poignant witness to the breathtaking scope of God’s grace.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 2:1-21; 6:17, 22-25; Matt 1:5; Heb 11:31; Jas 2:25<\/p>","summary_ro":"Rahab Rahab, a prostitute and a woman of faith, remains enigmatic centuries after her brief appearance in Israel’s history. Because she placed her faith in Israel’s God and helped the two Israelite scouts who came to her house, her life was spared when Israel captured Jericho. Because Rahab’s house stood on the wall of the city, Joshua’s scouts went there when they entered Jericho. Rahab might have been an innkeeper as well as a prostitute; other documents from the Old Testament era record wo...","summary_en":"Rahab Rahab, a prostitute and a woman of faith, remains enigmatic centuries after her brief appearance in Israel’s history. Because she placed her faith in Israel’s God and helped the two Israelite scouts who came to her house, her life was spared when Israel captured Jericho. Because Rahab’s house stood on the wall of the city, Joshua’s scouts went there when they entered Jericho. Rahab might have been an innkeeper as well as a prostitute; other documents from the Old Testament era record wo...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":68731,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Rahab","title_en":"Rahab","content_ro":"<h3>Rahab<\/h3>\n<p>Rahab, a prostitute and a woman of faith, remains enigmatic centuries after her brief appearance in Israel’s history. Because she placed her faith in Israel’s God and helped the two Israelite scouts who came to her house, her life was spared when Israel captured Jericho.<\/p> \n<p>Because Rahab’s house stood on the wall of the city, Joshua’s scouts went there when they entered Jericho. Rahab might have been an innkeeper as well as a prostitute; other documents from the Old Testament era record women innkeepers who were also prostitutes. If Rahab’s house was in fact an inn, it would have been a reasonable destination; Joshua’s scouts could hope they would not attract unwanted attention.<\/p>\n<p>Rahab’s arrangement with the scouts was a stirring declaration of faith in Yahweh, Israel’s God (Josh 2:8-21). As a Canaanite woman, Rahab would have practiced the fertility cult of Baal, god of the storm and life-giving rain, and of his consort Asherah, the mother earth goddess. Yet based on reports of Israel’s progress toward her land, Rahab recognized that Yahweh, the God of Israel, is “the supreme God of the heavens above and the earth below” (2:11).<\/p>\n<p>After Joshua’s conquest of Jericho, Rahab married Salmon of the tribe of Judah; she gave birth to a son, whom they named Boaz (Ruth 4:21; Matt 1:5). Thus, Rahab was the mother-in-law of Ruth, another foreign woman adopted into Israel. Rahab was also King David’s great-great-grandmother. She is listed with Moses, David, Samson, and Samuel as an example of faith demonstrated by good deeds (Heb 11:31; Jas 2:25). She is one of five women (including Mary) mentioned in Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus, the human family tree of God’s Son (Matt 1:5). Rahab bears especially poignant witness to the breathtaking scope of God’s grace.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 2:1-21; 6:17, 22-25; Matt 1:5; Heb 11:31; Jas 2:25<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Rahab<\/h3>\n<p>Rahab, a prostitute and a woman of faith, remains enigmatic centuries after her brief appearance in Israel’s history. Because she placed her faith in Israel’s God and helped the two Israelite scouts who came to her house, her life was spared when Israel captured Jericho.<\/p> \n<p>Because Rahab’s house stood on the wall of the city, Joshua’s scouts went there when they entered Jericho. Rahab might have been an innkeeper as well as a prostitute; other documents from the Old Testament era record women innkeepers who were also prostitutes. If Rahab’s house was in fact an inn, it would have been a reasonable destination; Joshua’s scouts could hope they would not attract unwanted attention.<\/p>\n<p>Rahab’s arrangement with the scouts was a stirring declaration of faith in Yahweh, Israel’s God (Josh 2:8-21). As a Canaanite woman, Rahab would have practiced the fertility cult of Baal, god of the storm and life-giving rain, and of his consort Asherah, the mother earth goddess. Yet based on reports of Israel’s progress toward her land, Rahab recognized that Yahweh, the God of Israel, is “the supreme God of the heavens above and the earth below” (2:11).<\/p>\n<p>After Joshua’s conquest of Jericho, Rahab married Salmon of the tribe of Judah; she gave birth to a son, whom they named Boaz (Ruth 4:21; Matt 1:5). Thus, Rahab was the mother-in-law of Ruth, another foreign woman adopted into Israel. Rahab was also King David’s great-great-grandmother. She is listed with Moses, David, Samson, and Samuel as an example of faith demonstrated by good deeds (Heb 11:31; Jas 2:25). She is one of five women (including Mary) mentioned in Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus, the human family tree of God’s Son (Matt 1:5). Rahab bears especially poignant witness to the breathtaking scope of God’s grace.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 2:1-21; 6:17, 22-25; Matt 1:5; Heb 11:31; Jas 2:25<\/p>","summary_ro":"Rahab Rahab, a prostitute and a woman of faith, remains enigmatic centuries after her brief appearance in Israel’s history. Because she placed her faith in Israel’s God and helped the two Israelite scouts who came to her house, her life was spared when Israel captured Jericho. Because Rahab’s house stood on the wall of the city, Joshua’s scouts went there when they entered Jericho. Rahab might have been an innkeeper as well as a prostitute; other documents from the Old Testament era record wo...","summary_en":"Rahab Rahab, a prostitute and a woman of faith, remains enigmatic centuries after her brief appearance in Israel’s history. Because she placed her faith in Israel’s God and helped the two Israelite scouts who came to her house, her life was spared when Israel captured Jericho. Because Rahab’s house stood on the wall of the city, Joshua’s scouts went there when they entered Jericho. Rahab might have been an innkeeper as well as a prostitute; other documents from the Old Testament era record wo...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":96357,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Rahab","title_en":"Rahab","content_ro":"<h3>Rahab<\/h3>\n<p>Rahab, a prostitute and a woman of faith, remains enigmatic centuries after her brief appearance in Israel’s history. Because she placed her faith in Israel’s God and helped the two Israelite scouts who came to her house, her life was spared when Israel captured Jericho.<\/p> \n<p>Because Rahab’s house stood on the wall of the city, Joshua’s scouts went there when they entered Jericho. Rahab might have been an innkeeper as well as a prostitute; other documents from the Old Testament era record women innkeepers who were also prostitutes. If Rahab’s house was in fact an inn, it would have been a reasonable destination; Joshua’s scouts could hope they would not attract unwanted attention.<\/p>\n<p>Rahab’s arrangement with the scouts was a stirring declaration of faith in Yahweh, Israel’s God (Josh 2:8-21). As a Canaanite woman, Rahab would have practiced the fertility cult of Baal, god of the storm and life-giving rain, and of his consort Asherah, the mother earth goddess. Yet based on reports of Israel’s progress toward her land, Rahab recognized that Yahweh, the God of Israel, is “the supreme God of the heavens above and the earth below” (2:11).<\/p>\n<p>After Joshua’s conquest of Jericho, Rahab married Salmon of the tribe of Judah; she gave birth to a son, whom they named Boaz (Ruth 4:21; Matt 1:5). Thus, Rahab was the mother-in-law of Ruth, another foreign woman adopted into Israel. Rahab was also King David’s great-great-grandmother. She is listed with Moses, David, Samson, and Samuel as an example of faith demonstrated by good deeds (Heb 11:31; Jas 2:25). She is one of five women (including Mary) mentioned in Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus, the human family tree of God’s Son (Matt 1:5). Rahab bears especially poignant witness to the breathtaking scope of God’s grace.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 2:1-21; 6:17, 22-25; Matt 1:5; Heb 11:31; Jas 2:25<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Rahab<\/h3>\n<p>Rahab, a prostitute and a woman of faith, remains enigmatic centuries after her brief appearance in Israel’s history. Because she placed her faith in Israel’s God and helped the two Israelite scouts who came to her house, her life was spared when Israel captured Jericho.<\/p> \n<p>Because Rahab’s house stood on the wall of the city, Joshua’s scouts went there when they entered Jericho. Rahab might have been an innkeeper as well as a prostitute; other documents from the Old Testament era record women innkeepers who were also prostitutes. If Rahab’s house was in fact an inn, it would have been a reasonable destination; Joshua’s scouts could hope they would not attract unwanted attention.<\/p>\n<p>Rahab’s arrangement with the scouts was a stirring declaration of faith in Yahweh, Israel’s God (Josh 2:8-21). As a Canaanite woman, Rahab would have practiced the fertility cult of Baal, god of the storm and life-giving rain, and of his consort Asherah, the mother earth goddess. Yet based on reports of Israel’s progress toward her land, Rahab recognized that Yahweh, the God of Israel, is “the supreme God of the heavens above and the earth below” (2:11).<\/p>\n<p>After Joshua’s conquest of Jericho, Rahab married Salmon of the tribe of Judah; she gave birth to a son, whom they named Boaz (Ruth 4:21; Matt 1:5). Thus, Rahab was the mother-in-law of Ruth, another foreign woman adopted into Israel. Rahab was also King David’s great-great-grandmother. She is listed with Moses, David, Samson, and Samuel as an example of faith demonstrated by good deeds (Heb 11:31; Jas 2:25). She is one of five women (including Mary) mentioned in Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus, the human family tree of God’s Son (Matt 1:5). Rahab bears especially poignant witness to the breathtaking scope of God’s grace.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 2:1-21; 6:17, 22-25; Matt 1:5; Heb 11:31; Jas 2:25<\/p>","summary_ro":"Rahab Rahab, a prostitute and a woman of faith, remains enigmatic centuries after her brief appearance in Israel’s history. Because she placed her faith in Israel’s God and helped the two Israelite scouts who came to her house, her life was spared when Israel captured Jericho. Because Rahab’s house stood on the wall of the city, Joshua’s scouts went there when they entered Jericho. Rahab might have been an innkeeper as well as a prostitute; other documents from the Old Testament era record wo...","summary_en":"Rahab Rahab, a prostitute and a woman of faith, remains enigmatic centuries after her brief appearance in Israel’s history. Because she placed her faith in Israel’s God and helped the two Israelite scouts who came to her house, her life was spared when Israel captured Jericho. Because Rahab’s house stood on the wall of the city, Joshua’s scouts went there when they entered Jericho. Rahab might have been an innkeeper as well as a prostitute; other documents from the Old Testament era record wo...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":123983,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Rahab","title_en":"Rahab","content_ro":"<h3>Rahab<\/h3>\n<p>Rahab, a prostitute and a woman of faith, remains enigmatic centuries after her brief appearance in Israel’s history. Because she placed her faith in Israel’s God and helped the two Israelite scouts who came to her house, her life was spared when Israel captured Jericho.<\/p> \n<p>Because Rahab’s house stood on the wall of the city, Joshua’s scouts went there when they entered Jericho. Rahab might have been an innkeeper as well as a prostitute; other documents from the Old Testament era record women innkeepers who were also prostitutes. If Rahab’s house was in fact an inn, it would have been a reasonable destination; Joshua’s scouts could hope they would not attract unwanted attention.<\/p>\n<p>Rahab’s arrangement with the scouts was a stirring declaration of faith in Yahweh, Israel’s God (Josh 2:8-21). As a Canaanite woman, Rahab would have practiced the fertility cult of Baal, god of the storm and life-giving rain, and of his consort Asherah, the mother earth goddess. Yet based on reports of Israel’s progress toward her land, Rahab recognized that Yahweh, the God of Israel, is “the supreme God of the heavens above and the earth below” (2:11).<\/p>\n<p>After Joshua’s conquest of Jericho, Rahab married Salmon of the tribe of Judah; she gave birth to a son, whom they named Boaz (Ruth 4:21; Matt 1:5). Thus, Rahab was the mother-in-law of Ruth, another foreign woman adopted into Israel. Rahab was also King David’s great-great-grandmother. She is listed with Moses, David, Samson, and Samuel as an example of faith demonstrated by good deeds (Heb 11:31; Jas 2:25). She is one of five women (including Mary) mentioned in Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus, the human family tree of God’s Son (Matt 1:5). Rahab bears especially poignant witness to the breathtaking scope of God’s grace.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 2:1-21; 6:17, 22-25; Matt 1:5; Heb 11:31; Jas 2:25<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Rahab<\/h3>\n<p>Rahab, a prostitute and a woman of faith, remains enigmatic centuries after her brief appearance in Israel’s history. Because she placed her faith in Israel’s God and helped the two Israelite scouts who came to her house, her life was spared when Israel captured Jericho.<\/p> \n<p>Because Rahab’s house stood on the wall of the city, Joshua’s scouts went there when they entered Jericho. Rahab might have been an innkeeper as well as a prostitute; other documents from the Old Testament era record women innkeepers who were also prostitutes. If Rahab’s house was in fact an inn, it would have been a reasonable destination; Joshua’s scouts could hope they would not attract unwanted attention.<\/p>\n<p>Rahab’s arrangement with the scouts was a stirring declaration of faith in Yahweh, Israel’s God (Josh 2:8-21). As a Canaanite woman, Rahab would have practiced the fertility cult of Baal, god of the storm and life-giving rain, and of his consort Asherah, the mother earth goddess. Yet based on reports of Israel’s progress toward her land, Rahab recognized that Yahweh, the God of Israel, is “the supreme God of the heavens above and the earth below” (2:11).<\/p>\n<p>After Joshua’s conquest of Jericho, Rahab married Salmon of the tribe of Judah; she gave birth to a son, whom they named Boaz (Ruth 4:21; Matt 1:5). Thus, Rahab was the mother-in-law of Ruth, another foreign woman adopted into Israel. Rahab was also King David’s great-great-grandmother. She is listed with Moses, David, Samson, and Samuel as an example of faith demonstrated by good deeds (Heb 11:31; Jas 2:25). She is one of five women (including Mary) mentioned in Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus, the human family tree of God’s Son (Matt 1:5). Rahab bears especially poignant witness to the breathtaking scope of God’s grace.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 2:1-21; 6:17, 22-25; Matt 1:5; Heb 11:31; Jas 2:25<\/p>","summary_ro":"Rahab Rahab, a prostitute and a woman of faith, remains enigmatic centuries after her brief appearance in Israel’s history. Because she placed her faith in Israel’s God and helped the two Israelite scouts who came to her house, her life was spared when Israel captured Jericho. Because Rahab’s house stood on the wall of the city, Joshua’s scouts went there when they entered Jericho. Rahab might have been an innkeeper as well as a prostitute; other documents from the Old Testament era record wo...","summary_en":"Rahab Rahab, a prostitute and a woman of faith, remains enigmatic centuries after her brief appearance in Israel’s history. Because she placed her faith in Israel’s God and helped the two Israelite scouts who came to her house, her life was spared when Israel captured Jericho. Because Rahab’s house stood on the wall of the city, Joshua’s scouts went there when they entered Jericho. Rahab might have been an innkeeper as well as a prostitute; other documents from the Old Testament era record wo...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}]},"labels":{"article":"Articol","map":"Hartă","chart":"Diagramă","textbox":"Notă explicativă","picture":"Imagine","profile":"Profil","study_note":"Notă de studiu","theme_note":"Temă biblică"},"icons":{"article":"📖","map":"🗺️","chart":"📊","textbox":"💡","picture":"🖼️","profile":"👤","study_note":"📝","theme_note":"🎯"},"typeColors":{"article":"#d4af37","map":"#2d7d46","chart":"#3b82f6","textbox":"#8b5cf6","picture":"#ec4899","profile":"#f59e0b","study_note":"#06b6d4","theme_note":"#ef4444"}}
🔍
Niciun rezultat
Nu am găsit versete care să conțină textul căutat.
Rut 4
— 22 versete
Rut 4
📘 Info carte
Se încarcă...
📖 Resurse