13 Now that same day two of them were going to a village called Emmaus, about seven miles from Jerusalem. 14 They were talking with each other about everything that had happened. 15 As they talked and discussed these things with each other, Jesus himself came up and walked along with them; 16 but they were kept from recognizing him.
17 He asked them, "What are you discussing together as you walk along?" 18 They stood still, their faces downcast. One of them, named Cleopas, asked him, "Are you only a visitor to Jerusalem and do not know the things that have happened there in these days?"
19 "What things?" he asked. 20 "About Jesus of Nazareth," they replied. "He was a prophet, powerful in word and deed before God and all the people. The chief priests and our rulers handed him over to be sentenced to death, and they crucified him; 21 but we had hoped that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel. And what is more, it is the third day since all this took place. 22 In addition, some of our women amazed us. They went to the tomb early this morning 23 but didn't find his body. They came and told us that they had seen a vision of angels, who said he was alive. 24 Then some of our companions went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said, but him they did not see."
25 He said to them, "How foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Did not the Christ have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?" 27 And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.
28 As they approached the village to which they were going, Jesus acted as if he were going farther. 29 But they urged him strongly, "Stay with us, for it is nearly evening; the day is almost over." So he went in to stay with them.
30 When he was at the table with them, he took bread, gave thanks, broke it and began to give it to them. 31 Then their eyes were opened and they recognized him, and he disappeared from their sight. 32 They asked each other, "Were not our hearts burning within us while he talked with us on the road and opened the Scriptures to us?"
33 They got up and returned at once to Jerusalem. There they found the Eleven and those with them, assembled together 34 and saying, "It is true! The Lord has risen and has appeared to Simon." 35 Then the two told what had happened on the way, and how Jesus was recognized by them when he broke the bread.
The Life of Your Table?
Luke 24:13-35
Sermon
by Leonard Sweet
How many of you here this morning remember “Stone Soup”? No, I don’t mean the magazine. No, I don’t mean the recipe.
I mean the story. “Stone Soup” is an old folk-tale, told and re-told with slightly different details in dozens of countries and cultures. In case you’ve forgotten it is a fable that focuses on the ingenuity of some weary travelers who arrive at a small village with nothing. No food, no money, nothing. All they have is a large cooking pot. The travelers are met with suspicion and surliness everywhere they go. No doors are opened to them. No invitations of hospitality are extended.
The travelers then build a fire in the commons of the village square. They fill their cauldron, their big pot with water and one large stone, and place it over the fire. They sit around the pot rubbing their hands in expectation, talking about their anticipation of a great delicacy — “stone soup.”
The villagers grow curious and one by one come out to ask the travelers what they are doing. Most importantly, what are they cooking that is exciting them so much? The travelers reply to each villager who approaches that the “stone soup” they are cooking is absolutely the most exquisite soup anyone could ever taste.
But the best could be even better if it received just one more ingredient. To one villager they mention carrots. To another villager they suggest potatoes. To a third villager they muse that a big beef bone would add much to the mixture.
As more villagers approach and more ingredients are suggested, the cauldron of “stone soup” gradually takes on the identity of a rich, thick stew — a stew capable of feeding all of those who contributed to its creation and then some. At the end of the story, all of the villagers and the travelers sit together on the commons and enjoy an unexpected and hearty meal together.
“Stone Soup” is not a story about how to get a “free lunch.” “Stone Soup” is a story about the transforming power of hospitality, but a reverse hospitality. It is the weary travelers with empty hands who invite the first wary villager to join them in their watery wares. It is the strangers who offered hospitality to the inhospitable hosts.
“Stone soup” is the story of a gift of calories and community to a village that was too scared to share.
In the first century, unfortunately, Roman culture dictated the customs and decorum of hospitality. Roman banquets, also known as “symposia” (most definitely NOT the staid lectures we think of when we hear this term) were scenes of exquisite excess, the very definition of “conspicuous consumption.” They featured gluttonous amounts of food, course after course of rich delicacies, often lasting for ten hours or more. Flamingo tongues and mullet livers were a few of the delicacies favored by Marcus Gavius Apicius, a noted Roman gourmet who lived at the same time as Jesus.
What is more, the food was just the precursor for the tidal waves of wine and the “other” entertainment that would follow. The saddest feature of these feasts was the theology behind it. Romans hoped that all of this partying would detour any meddling or punishment that their pantheon of bored and mercurial gods might want to pour down upon the pathetic, mortal human population. The Romans used “bread and circuses” not just to keep the general populace happy, but also to keep their unpredictable gods at skyline-length distance.
In first century Jewish households dining was just a bit different. Although there were economic differences between the peasant population and the educated elite, the over-arching mandates of the Torah tempered those differences. The members of the Sanhedrin and the Pharisaic power structure might have had more to spend on what they served. But they maintained the basics of Jewish faith that were practiced daily in every Jewish household. Unlike the Romans, the feast days within Judaism did not exist to keep God away, but to invite God’s presence.
Whether it was a formal “feast day” or the weekly “Shabbat,” the meal that was shared was intended to invite God’s presence as well as the presence of other members of the community. It was the presence of the divine that made these meals sacred and special. With the structures and strictures of kosher laws, dining together in a first century Jewish community was always oriented towards the Torah, towards God’s special presence at their table. But that also meant that many others would be excluded.
Jesus broke all these dining rules. Jesus introduced a whole new set of table manners. He ate on fast days. He ate with tax collectors. He called Zacchaeus out of a tree and invited himself to his home for dinner. He ate at wedding feasts and at smart, sophisticated Pharisaic gatherings. He sipped water at a well out of the bucket of a woman of highly questionable reputation. With no home of his own, Jesus ate as a guest in someone’s home every night of his missionary life.
But most “rule-breaking” of all was this: wherever Jesus dined he was the guest…yet he always took on the role of the host.
When Jesus showed up for dinner, the menu changed. Instead of simply good food, those around a table that had invited Jesus received the gift of God’s presence and the super-food of faith. It is a gift that still continues at every faithful meal we sit down to today.
Cleopas and his companion (whom many scholars think may have been his wife Mary, one of the Mary’s who stayed with Jesus during his crucifixion) walk along the road to their home village of Emmaus. They are mulling over the dreadful events that had happened in Jerusalem: the crucifixion of their rabbi Jesus, the strange disappearance of his body from his tomb.
Suddenly, they are joined by a stranger who seems to have no knowledge of all these tragedies. For Cleopas, it is the equivalent of someone asking you on September 12, 2001 — “What’s wrong?” or “Why is everyone in such turmoil?” EVERYTHING is wrong! Cleopas’ whole world has been exploded. He cannot believe how clueless this fellow traveler is.
Yet after Cleopas offers his version of the Jerusalem story — the trial, the torture, the crucifixion, the death, the strangely empty tomb — this new companion on their journey is surprised only by Cleopas’ ignorance of his own family history. “Oh how foolish you are, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have declared” (Luke 24:25).
Instead of decrying these recent horrors, the person walking with these two disciples of Jesus offers the testimony of the ages, the words of the prophets God had sent to countless generations that confirmed the work of God, the fulfilled purpose of God, in the events that had just occurred in Jerusalem.
Those words warmed the hearts of these Emmaus travelers so much that when their companion acted as though he might head out in another direction, they invited him to stay with them, to join them for a meal, and even overnight. “Stay with us,” they implored.
And so he did. He accompanied these two disciples, this couple, to their family home in Emmaus and patiently waited for the evening meal. Finally they sat together at table. Then this invited guest stepped over the bounds. Instead of being a good guest and waiting for his “host” to offer the blessing over the bread and food, this guest grasped the bread and lifted it up and offered the traditional Jewish blessing, “Blessed are you, Lord our God, Ruler of the Universe, who brings forth bread from the land.”
As this guest reached for the bread, his hands were exposed as he turned his palms upward and opened his fingers to receive the staff of life. His fingerprints, his palmprints, were marked upon the meal. The wounds of the crucifixion were bare. The familiarity of those hands were revealed. These were hands they had seen before – healing, gesturing, touching, picking up children. And these were the hands that took their wounds with them into eternity. Not the scars, which are closed, healed wounds. But the open, raw wounds: “Then I saw a Lamb, looking as if it had been slain” (Revelation 5:6).
Michael Williams has written about Thomas' reaction when he sees Jesus' wounds, “My Lord and my God.” Do you say "My Lord and my God" when you see Christ's wounds wherever they appear in the world?" And as Mother Theresa reminded us every time she spoke, we see Jesus (and his wounds) every day. So…what IS our reaction and response?
In the Emmaus Road story, when the two disciples, or what we suspect was a couple Cleopas and Mary, saw his wounds, suddenly the family knew who was at their table. “My Lord and My God.” When Jesus once again breached “table etiquette” and grasped the bread and blessed it, he was revealed to Cleopas and his family as the risen Christ. Jesus assumed the place of head of the table.
At every meal Jesus ate meals with outcasts, outliers, friends, strangers, officials Jesus was both guest and host. He graciously accepted, and sometime cajoled, invitations to meals in unexpected places. Jesus’ presence turned every tablescape into an altar. There was always a mystery food on the table wherever Jesus ate: the food of his presence. Every table where Jesus ate was a pot luck meal: but the biggest pot on the table was the gift of his presence, the meal of the very revelation of God.
We commonly imagine the “Last Supper” Jesus presided over in his earthly life to be a Passover Seder. But the fact is that when Jesus walked the earth the Temple was still offering the Passover sacrifices for the Jewish faithful. There was no “Seder supper” for these Temple-era Jews. The “Passover” meal was a feast on the Paschal lamb that had been sacrificed at the Temple — not some memorial meal with bitter herbs, eggs, and matza. It was not until the Temple was destroyed that the home table became the new altar for observant Jews — a way to commemorate the history of Jewish history.
For those who follow Jesus, a new tradition was launched in the Upper Room in Jerusalem with the Last Supper. The unleavened bread and the cup of wine offered to his closest disciples marked the first “Passover” of a new era. This was an invitation to a meal where the Lord would always be present, where a gift of hospitality, the offering of food and drink in the name of Jesu Christos, would transform whatever the meal, whatever time of year, into a banquet. When Jesus is at table, the best thing on the table is not something you can table: the presence of God. The very presence of Jesus turns a simple meal into a sumptuous feast.
As Jesus walked unrecognized along the Emmaus Road with his two disciples, he tutored them, he mentored them, he showcased for them personally the grand story of God throughout the Scriptures. But not until he was invited to dinner and ate with them did they finally recognize him. As any good guest, Jesus would have waited for his hosts to prepare the food and put it on the table. Yet against the good table manners of any good guest, once they are all seated Jesus takes it upon himself to grasp the bread. Remember, this was not the Sabbath, so it was ordinary, everyday bread, but still worthy of blessing. Jesus arrogates to himself the privilege of offering the table blessing for the meal. In doing this one act, Jesus immediately transformed himself from the late invited “guest” into the “host-in-charge.”
As Jesus reached out and took that daily bread from the plate to break it, his hands would have been exposed and revealed hands tattooed by the open wounds of his crucifixion, yet familiar and known to Cleopas and all his other disciples. We all know the hands of our loved ones. We don’t know their fingerprints but we know their fingers, the tributaries of the veins that trace their skin, the curvature of each digit, the blemishes, scars, and spots that mark the terrain of their hand. When Jesus reached out and snatched up that loaf of bread, his hands, his scars or his wounds, revealed who he was to that household of uncomprehending followers. Jesus didn’t just bless the bread. Jesus blessed those present with the recognition of God’s presence.
It is in sharing a meal where Jesus is present that Jesus once again becomes known to those who would follow him. It is as he becomes the head of the table that the bread of life is revealed in all its resurrected presence and power.
Where is Jesus at your table? Is he present? Is he the life of your table?
We often talk about a Jewish “coming of age” ritual as a bar or bat mitzvah. But it is improper to talk about “having” a bar or bat mitzvah. You don’t “have a bar mitzvah.” You become bar mitzvah. You become bat mitzvah. “Mitzvah” means commandment, or blessing. “Bar” means “son of.” “Bat” means “daughter of.” So to be “bar mitzvah” means to become a “son of the commandment” or “son of the blessing.” To be “bat mitzvah” means to become a “daughter of the commandment” or “daughter of the blessing.”
A Jew is bar mitzvah or bat mitzvah.
A Christian is bar messiah or bat messiah.
I am bar messiah . . .. Son of the Risen and Rising Lord. Son of the Blessing.
The Table is our bar messiah, our bat messiah ritual. It is where we discover who we are, son/daughter of the blessing, the Bread of Life, the Cup of Salvation. Have you found your Table? Have you invited Jesus to be head of your Table? Have you allowed Jesus to be the life of your Table?
ChristianGlobe Networks, Inc., Leonard Sweet Sermon, by Leonard Sweet
Context · The Resurrection and Ascension of Jesus, the Savior for All People (24:1–53): On the third day, Jesus is raised from the dead! God’s plan included suffering as the path to glory. After being raised, Jesus appears to many disciples, proving to them he is actually alive and explaining what has happened. He commissions them to bear witness to all nations and promises them power from on high for their task. He ascends to heaven, but his ministry on earth will continue through his Spirit-empowered church. The book of Acts continues the Savior’s amazing story.
Overview:The resurrection discovered (24:1–12): On the first day of the week (Sunday), some women disciples return to the tomb to finish anointing Jesus’s body for burial. They are surprised when they find the stone already rolle…
The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016
13 Now that same day two of them were going to a village called Emmaus, about seven miles from Jerusalem. 14 They were talking with each other about everything that had happened. 15 As they talked and discussed these things with each other, Jesus himself came up and walked along with them; 16 but they were kept from recognizing him.
17 He asked them, "What are you discussing together as you walk along?" 18 They stood still, their faces downcast. One of them, named Cleopas, asked him, "Are you only a visitor to Jerusalem and do not know the things that have happened there in these days?"
19 "What things?" he asked. 20 "About Jesus of Nazareth," they replied. "He was a prophet, powerful in word and deed before God and all the people. The chief priests and our rulers handed him over to be sentenced to death, and they crucified him; 21 but we had hoped that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel. And what is more, it is the third day since all this took place. 22 In addition, some of our women amazed us. They went to the tomb early this morning 23 but didn't find his body. They came and told us that they had seen a vision of angels, who said he was alive. 24 Then some of our companions went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said, but him they did not see."
25 He said to them, "How foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Did not the Christ have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?" 27 And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.
28 As they approached the village to which they were going, Jesus acted as if he were going farther. 29 But they urged him strongly, "Stay with us, for it is nearly evening; the day is almost over." So he went in to stay with them.
30 When he was at the table with them, he took bread, gave thanks, broke it and began to give it to them. 31 Then their eyes were opened and they recognized him, and he disappeared from their sight. 32 They asked each other, "Were not our hearts burning within us while he talked with us on the road and opened the Scriptures to us?"
33 They got up and returned at once to Jerusalem. There they found the Eleven and those with them, assembled together 34 and saying, "It is true! The Lord has risen and has appeared to Simon." 35 Then the two told what had happened on the way, and how Jesus was recognized by them when he broke the bread.
The first resurrection appearance recorded in Luke’s Gospel is found here in 24:13–35. Two people are traveling to Emmaus from Jerusalem. The distance of sixty stadia is about seven miles. As they travel, they are discussing the events of the previous day, and Jesus catches up with them as they journey. They cannot recognize Jesus, not because he looks different, but because in God’s sovereignty they are prevented from identifying him. When Jesus inquires about the topic of their conversation, Cleopas (cf. John 19:25, which may refer to the same person; the identity of Cleopas’s partner is unknown, but perhaps it was his wife) responds by identifying Jesus as a prophet through whom God has worked in a mighty way. Nevertheless, he has been executed by the religious leaders, indicating that he could not have been the Messiah (24:21). To make matters worse, some women are saying that this Jesus is alive. They are right that the tomb is empty, but such a report could not be believed because no one has seen Jesus. The “unknown” Jesus counters the belief of these two by pointing to the Scriptures. The Old Testament Scriptures clearly teach that the Messiah must suffer before he enters into glory. For the texts that Jesus used, one should probably refer to the speeches in the book of Acts (Acts 2:14–39; 3:12–26; 13:16–41). The two persuade Jesus to spend the evening with them, and in a scene that recalls the Last Supper, they recognize him as he breaks bread and gives thanks. These two people, however, were probably not present at the Last Supper, and thus they may simply be recalling being with Jesus on other occasions when he gave thanks. Jesus immediately vanishes, and they decide to return to Jerusalem and tell the others the good news. But when they arrive the Eleven speak first, informing them that the Lord has arisen and has “appeared to Simon” (24:34). Then the two companions relate the story of their encounter with Jesus (24:35).
The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary by Gary M. Burge, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
Big Idea: Luke’s first record of an appearance by the risen Jesus is to two otherwise unknown disciples outside Jerusalem who do not recognize him until he breaks bread with them.
Understanding the Text
Following the discovery of the empty tomb, Luke’s Gospel records only two occasions (and hints at another one [24:34]) when the risen Jesus appeared to his disciples, both on the evening of Easter day itself, and chapter 24 taken alone would suggest that Jesus’s ascension followed immediately that same night. But Luke will record in Acts 1:3 that in fact Jesus appeared to his disciples frequently over a forty-day period leading up to the ascension, so that the few appearances recorded in his Gospel must be taken as only selected examples. Their interlinking, along with the sequence leading up to the ascension, means that Luke’s postresurrection appearances, unlike those in Matthew and John, occur only in the immediate area of Jerusalem. The return to Galilee (Matt. 28:7, 10, 16–20; Mark 16:7; John 21) falls outside Luke’s deliberately selective scheme.
Historical and Cultural Background
Luke has already indicated (23:49; 24:9; cf. 24:33) that the circle of Jesus’s followers in Jerusalem extended well beyond the twelve (now eleven) apostles from the Galilee period and the group of women who were at the tomb. Here we meet two Judean residents who were fully accepted as part of the group (note the phrases “our women” [24:22] and “our companions” [24:24]), which Luke will reckon a few weeks later as containing 120 members (Acts 1:15).
Hospitality to a passing stranger (especially one with whom they have enjoyed animated conversation) was an expected part of Palestinian culture. What is quite irregular is the assumption by Jesus of the role of host rather than guest at the meal.
Interpretive Insights
24:13 Emmaus, about seven miles from Jerusalem. The exact location is debated (and some manuscripts give a distance of nearly twenty miles, not seven) and is not important, but the involvement of residents of a village some distance from Jerusalem indicates the widening impact of Jesus’s message. A distance of seven miles allows time for the journey to be made in both directions on the same day.
24:14 about everything that had happened. In 24:19–24 we will hear the gist of this conversation. They have perhaps been staying in Jerusalem for the Passover festival, and so they have witnessed the whole sequence up to and including the dramatic announcement by the women.
24:15 Jesus himself came up and walked along with them. While there are features of the risen Jesus in the Gospel accounts that differ from normal human experience (notably the ability to appear and disappear suddenly, even through closed doors), the principal impression is of a human body sufficiently unchanged (though restored after the horror of crucifixion) to be perceived as a normal human being (cf. John 20:15; 21:4).
24:16 they were kept from recognizing him. Compare Luke’s strong statements about the disciples’ earlier inability to understand Jesus’s words (9:45; 18:34). The language in Greek here is quite forceful: “their eyes were overpowered.” As in John 20:16; 21:7, recognition will subsequently follow. In this case, however, it takes longer, and this allows time for the stranger to deliver the remarkable “seminar” that follows before they reach their destination.
24:18 One of them, named Cleopas. We know nothing else of this man; it is possible that he is the Clopas of John 19:25, but that is speculation. Nor do we know whether his companion was male or female (Cleopas’s wife?). They are simply two among the group of Judean supporters of Jesus from whom, along with the Galilean disciples, the church in Acts will emerge.
Are you the only one visiting Jerusalem who does not know? From the disciples’ point of view, the execution of Jesus dominated their recent experience. Others in the crowded city at festival time may not have been so keenly aware of it. It was the events recorded in Acts 2–5 that would bring Jesus’s name more fully into public notice some weeks later.
24:19–21 a prophet ... we had hoped that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel. This poignant description expresses the conflicting attitudes of Jesus’s Judean supporters. His prophetic status is not in doubt, but his role as the Messiah remains a frustrated hope in the light of his condemnation by the Jewish authorities and now his decisive execution. The past tense (lit., “we were hoping”) conveys a dead aspiration that only Jesus’s resurrection will now be able to revive.
24:21 it is the third day. Is this simply a note of time, or did they have a vague memory that Jesus was supposed to have said something about what would happen “on the third day” (9:22; 18:33)?
24:22–23 some of our women amazed us. These two verses summarize 24:1–9 above, confirming that Luke’s description of the “two men” was intended to denote angels. These two travelers are thus to be included in “the Eleven and all the others” mentioned in 24:9.
24:24 some of our companions. Only Peter is mentioned in 24:12, but the plural here may reflect Luke’s knowledge of the fuller account in John 20:3–10, where Peter was accompanied by another disciple.
24:26 Did not the Messiah have to suffer these things? It was “these things” that had finally destroyed these disciples’ dawning hope that Jesus was the Messiah (24:20–21). Now they must learn to see things in a quite new light: Jesus’s rejection and death were not the end of his messianic claim, but rather the necessary means to its fulfillment. They should have known this, because it was already clear in the Old Testament prophets, as 24:27 will explain (and as he has already taught in 18:31–33).
enter his glory? Jesus’s resurrection is the first stage of this “entry,” which will be consummated in his ascension to heaven in 24:51. Luke has used “glory” to speak not only of the transfiguration of Jesus during his earthly life (9:31–32) but also of the future exercise of Jesus’s messianic authority in 9:26; 21:27. Compare the use of “glorify” in Acts 3:13.
24:27 what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself. The inclusion here of “Moses” and in 24:44 also of “the Psalms” points to a comprehensive hermeneutic of fulfillment that finds in Jesus the endpoint not only of selected prophetic oracles but also of the whole pattern of Scripture, including its nonpredictive as well as predictive parts. This is the basis on which the New Testament writers delighted to explore the links between the Old and New Testaments, including typological correspondence as well as prophetic prediction. The whole exciting project began with this groundbreaking “seminar” delivered by Jesus to two obscure disciples on the Emmaus road.
24:28 Jesus continued on as if he were going further. The verb prospoei? (“act as if”) can denote pretense, but here it indicates Jesus’s apparent intention. He politely will not presume on their hospitality until invited.
24:30 he took bread, gave thanks, broke it and began to give it to them. This was the host’s role, but Jesus naturally assumes that position. The verbs used are virtually the same as in 9:16; 22:19. We do not know whether these two disciples had been present at the Last Supper, but no doubt Jesus had followed the same familiar procedure at any other meal where they had been present with him.
24:31 Their eyes were opened and they recognized him. Their previous lack of recognition was described as God’s initiative (“they were kept from”), and so its release is also described with a passive verb. However, the sequence from 24:30 indicates (as does 24:35) that Jesus’s action in breaking the bread triggered their awareness of who he is. For the possibility that this action revealed the scars of the nails in his hands, see also on 24:39.
he disappeared from their sight. Literally, he “became invisible from them.” Several postresurrection stories are of a sudden appearance (e.g., 24:36; and cf. the use of the verb “appear to” in 24:34; 1Cor. 15:5–8); but this is the only one that describes how such an appearance ended. Jesus’s resurrection body apparently could relocate and/or become visible/invisible at will.
24:32 Were not our hearts burning within us? Their mounting sense of excitement now made sense. It is surprising that Jesus could explain his own scriptural credentials so fully without their guessing his identity; perhaps the idea of his being alive again was too improbable for them to accept, but 24:16 also indicates a divine purpose to postpone recognition until the climactic moment.
24:33–35 There they found the Eleven and those with them. A lot has happened in the five hours or so since the two set off for Emmaus. The original scorn of the male disciples at the women’s report has given way to dawning belief. The decisive new event has been the appearance to Peter, which must be presumed to be subsequent to his inconclusive visit to the tomb in 24:12. The Gospels have no other record of this individual appearance, but Paul records it as part of the received tradition in 1Corinthians 15:5. Now the experience of the two disciples at Emmaus further confirms the reality of Jesus’s resurrection.
Theological Insights
This postresurrection-appearance account is unique in the Gospels in its length and detail, in its focus on two otherwise unknown disciples (who seem to be given priority over the Eleven), and in its explicit statement that the risen Jesus could simply disappear at will. The blend of this unique feature with the ordinariness of Jesus’s physical appearance, which allowed him to be taken as an unremarkable fellow traveler and guest, neatly sums up the paradox of the Gospel accounts of Jesus’s resurrection body.
But the theological importance of the story lies also in its assertion (here and in 24:44–48) that it was Jesus himself who inaugurated the early Christian approach to Scripture, which would go on to discover pointers to Jesus across the whole range of the Old Testament, not only in its explicit messianic prophecies, and not only in its prophetic books, but also in “Moses” and “all the Scriptures.” In particular, New Testament typology would soon establish many links between aspects of Old Testament history, persons, and institutions and their “fulfillment” in the coming of the Messiah, who came to fulfill not only the prophets but also “the Law and the Prophets” (see Matt. 5:17; 11:13).
Teaching the Text
As noted above, this account of two disciples on the road to Emmaus is Luke’s most distinctive contribution to the Gospel resurrection appearances. Particularly important for these disciples (and for the teacher of this passage) is the surprising revelation that Scripture predicted all along that the Messiah must suffer. While these two disciples recognize that Jesus was a great prophet (24:19), his death negated their hopes that he might be the Messiah, “the one who was going to redeem Israel” (24:21). Jesus opens up their eyes to see that the sufferings of the Messiah were foretold in Scripture. His death does not negate his claims to be the Messiah. It rather confirms them.
When teaching this passage, you might ask listeners to put themselves in the position of these two disciples. What knowledge and/or expectations are they likely to have brought to the encounter? What aspects of Scripture and specific passages would Jesus have focused on in his teaching? What was it about this that would cause them to say, “Were not our hearts burning within us?”
In addition to this central theme, here are two others that could be developed in a sermon or lesson:
1. Discuss the nature of Jesus’s postresurrection appearances and how this one fits into the overall pattern. Why has Luke devoted so much space to the experience of two otherwise unknown disciples? What was the nature of a body that could both be mistaken for a fellow traveler and take part in a normal meal, and at the same time be capable of sudden disappearance?
2. An additional angle is to discuss the similarity of 24:30 to the accounts of the Last Supper. Is there a eucharistic element to the story? Why was it “in the breaking of bread” (the term used several times in Acts for the Christian fellowship meal) that Jesus was finally recognized? Is it significant that the disciples recognize Jesus not through the proofs of Scripture (24:27) but at a fellowship meal (24:31)?
Illustrating the Text
The “chance” encounter with Christ turns the disciples’ depression to excitement and teaches them to expect the resurrection.
Sermon: “Emmaus Epiphany,” by Cindy Holtrop.
The future they thought they had solved is turned on its head with this teacher’s words.
Here was a Savior who had saved them not from political enemies but from themselves. The guilt they placed on others was the guilt they found hidden in themselves. And the one whose death they mourned cancels their guilt. A whole new future is opening up for them. Their life compass is pointed in a new direction. They want to drink and eat more and more of what this stranger has to say.
Later they say to each other, “Didn’t our hearts burn as he talked with us along the road?”
What does it mean to have a “burning heart”? Your intense longing is finally fulfilled. Your eyes see something as if for the first time. The treasure you’ve been searching for is here. You realized the good news is really for you. The deliverer you were looking for has come and fills the deep cavity you did not know was there... .
Our hearts burn when the words of Scripture meet the horizon of our needs; that is, when the Word comes so close it shouts our name. It confronts our despair, shapes our future, and offers us Easter hope.1
We, like the two on the Emmaus road, need Christ to remind us of his power in our generation.
Theology: The Challenge of Jesus, by N.T. Wright. New Testament scholar N.T. Wright re-creates the Emmaus Road scene for the post-modern reader in a riveting and practical way:
Two unbelievers... [are] discussing, animatedly, how these things can be. How can the stories by which so many have lived have let us down? ...
Into this conversation comes Jesus, incognito....“What are you talking about?” he asks. They stand there looking sad. Then one of them says, “You must be about the only person in town who doesn’t know what a traumatic time the twentieth century has been. Nietzsche, Freud, and Marx were quite right. We had a war to end wars, and we’ve had nothing but more wars since. We had a sexual revolution, and now we have AIDS and... ended up with half the world in crippling debt. ... Our dreams have gone sour, and we don’t even know who “we” are anymore....
“Foolish ones,” replies Jesus; “How slow of heart you are to believe all that the Creator God has said! Did you never hear that... in his own death he dealt with evil once and for all?... and that he is even now at work, by his own Spirit to create a new human family in which repentance and forgiveness of sins are the order of the day, and so to challenge and overturn the rule of war, sex, money and power?”2
Teaching the Text by R.T. France, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
Direct Matches
Generally made of grain, this staple of foods has been known to be in existence since prehistoric days, being mentioned in the oldest literatures of humanity. Though usually made of wheat, it can be made of any grain and also some kinds of beans or lentils.
To make bread, grain must be ground into flour, mixed with salt and water, kneaded into a dough, and baked. Most breads included a leaven to add substance. As a food staple, it became a symbol of hospitality (Neh. 13:12; Matt. 14:15–21) and community as people ate together (Acts 2:42). Bread was considered a gift from God, so it was treated with special deference. Unleavened bread was required during Passover feasts and in most occasions related to the worship of God. The “bread of the Presence” (KJV: “shewbread”), representing the twelve tribes of Israel in the temple, was made of unleavened bread (Exod. 25:30) with special flour and was carefully eaten by the priests.
Jesus used bread in the Lord’s Prayer to represent asking God to meet our basic needs (Matt. 5:11), and he called himself the “bread of life” to show that he is the one who “gives life to the world,” our ultimate sustenance (John 6:33–35). During this exchange with the Jews about the bread of life, Jesus foreshadows what takes place at the Last Supper with his disciples, suggesting that believers must “eat [his] flesh” (represented by bread) and “drink [his] blood” (represented by wine) (John 6:53–59; cf. Luke 22:19). Additionally, bread was used symbolically to represent those things that were present in daily life (Pss. 127:2; 80:5; Prov. 4:17; 20:17).
The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesus followers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christ embodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in human history.
Birth and childhood. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem during the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesus was probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’s death (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of a virginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18; Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governor Quirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place in Bethlehem (2:15). Both the census and the governorship at the time of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars. Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to either confirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must be determined on the basis of one’s view regarding the general reliability of the Gospel tradition.
On the eighth day after his birth, Jesus was circumcised, in keeping with the Jewish law, at which time he officially was named “Jesus” (Luke 2:21). He spent his growing years in Nazareth, in the home of his parents, Joseph and Mary (2:40). Of the NT Gospels, the Gospel of Luke contains the only brief portrayal of Jesus’ growth in strength, wisdom, and favor with God and people (2:40, 52). Luke also contains the only account of Jesus as a young boy (2:41–49).
Baptism, temptation, and start of ministry. After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke 3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring to him as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instant ministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11; Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that the temptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Luke identify three specific temptations by the devil, though their order for the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesus was tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine intervention after jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’s kingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation, quoting Scripture in response.
Matthew and Mark record that Jesus began his ministry in Capernaum in Galilee, after the arrest of John the Baptist (Matt. 4:12–13; Mark 1:14). Luke says that Jesus started his ministry at about thirty years of age (3:23). This may be meant to indicate full maturity or perhaps correlate this age with the onset of the service of the Levites in the temple (cf. Num. 4:3). John narrates the beginning of Jesus’ ministry by focusing on the calling of the disciples and the sign performed at a wedding at Cana (1:35–2:11).
Galilean ministry. The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and around Galilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that the kingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment of prophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ first teaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30); the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for his calling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection and suffering.
All the Gospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in his Galilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke 5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioning of the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers is recorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministry is the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke 6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, in particular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synoptics focus on healings and exorcisms.
During Jesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with his identity. However, evil spirits knew him to be of supreme authority (Mark 3:11). Jesus was criticized by outsiders and by his own family (3:21). The scribes from Jerusalem identified him as a partner of Beelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesus told parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growing kingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humble beginnings (4:1–32).
The Synoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful. No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority or ability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized many demons (5:1–13), raised the dead (5:35–42), fed five thousand (6:30–44), and walked on water (6:48–49).
In the later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew and traveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are not written with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns to Galilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fear resolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee, where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ disciples with lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed the Pharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents (7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demanding a sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, who confessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus did provide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).
Jesus withdrew from Galilee to Tyre and Sidon, where a Syrophoenician woman requested healing for her daughter. Jesus replied, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Galileans had long resented the Syrian provincial leadership partiality that allotted governmental funds in ways that made the Jews receive mere “crumbs.” Consequently, when the woman replied, “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table,” Jesus applauded her faith (Matt. 15:27–28). Healing a deaf-mute man in the Decapolis provided another example of Jesus’ ministry in Gentile territory (Mark 7:31–37). Peter’s confession of Jesus as the Christ took place during Jesus’ travel to Caesarea Philippi, a well-known Gentile territory. The city was the ancient center of worship of the Hellenistic god Pan.
Judean ministry. Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry as he resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually led to his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem into three phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27). The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of the journey. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, and the demands on discipleship intensified as Jesus approached Jerusalem (Matt. 20:17–19, 26–28; Mark 10:38–39, 43–45; Luke 14:25–35). Luke presents the second phase of the journey toward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvation and judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase of the journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are the main themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).
Social conflicts with religious leaders increased throughout Jesus’ ministry. These conflicts led to lively challenge-riposte interactions concerning the Pharisaic schools of Shammai and Hillel (Matt. 19:1–12; Mark 10:1–12). Likewise, socioeconomic feathers were ruffled as Jesus welcomed young children, who had little value in society (Matt. 19:13–15; Mark 10:13–16; Luke 18:15–17).
Passion week, death, and resurrection. Each of the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with the crowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark 11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Luke describes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during which Jesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).
In Jerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17). Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because the whole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “began looking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segment of Jerusalem’s temple leadership inquired about Jesus’ authority (11:27–33). Jesus replied with cunning questions (12:16, 35–36), stories (12:1–12), denunciation (12:38–44), and a prediction of Jerusalem’s own destruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, Judas Iscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’ arrest (14:10–11).
At the Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a new covenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29; Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned the disciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark 14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and later he prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agony and submissiveness in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–42; Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–42). His arrest, trial, crucifixion, death, and resurrection followed (Matt. 26:46–28:15; Mark 14:43–16:8; Luke 22:47–24:9; John 18:1–20:18). Jesus finally commissioned his disciples to continue his mission by making disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:8) and ascended to heaven with the promise that he will one day return (Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:9–11).
A village approximately seven miles (sixty stadia in the Greek text) from Jerusalem. The village is of particular note because of Luke’s account of two disciples walking to Emmaus from Jerusalem and their encounter with the risen Christ (Luke 24:1332). It is located at the eastern end of the Ayalon Valley.
The tangible presence of God, experienced as overwhelming power and splendor. The main Hebrew word referring to glory, kabod, has the root meaning “heavy” (1Sam. 4:18), which in other contexts can mean “intense” (Exod. 9:3; NIV: “terrible”), “wealthy” (i.e., “heavy in possessions” [Gen. 13:2]), and “high reputation” (Gen. 34:19; NIV: “most honored”). When used of God, it refers to his person and his works. God reveals his glory to Israel and to Egypt at the crossing of the sea (Exod. 14:4, 1719). He carefully reveals his glory to Moses after Israel’s sin with the golden calf in order to assure him that he will not abandon them (33:12–23).
In the NT the glory of God is made real in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14; Heb. 1:3). He is, after all, the very presence of God. When he returns on the clouds, he will fully reveal God’s glory (Matt. 24:30; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27).
Physiologically, the heart is an organ in the body, and in the Bible it is also used in a number of metaphors.
Metaphorically, the heart refers to the mind, the will, the seat of emotions, or even the whole person. It also refers to the center of something or its inner part. These metaphors come from the heart’s importance and location.
Mind. The heart refers to the mind, but not the brain, and in these cases does not involve human physiology. It is a metaphor, and while the neurophysiology of the heart may be interesting in its own right, it has no bearing on this use of language. Deuteronomy 6:5 issues the command to love God with all one’s heart, soul, and strength. When the command is repeated in the Gospels, it occurs in three variations (Matt. 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27). Common to all three is the addition of the word “mind.” The Gospel writers want to be sure that the audience hears Jesus adding “mind,” but this addition is based on the fact that the meaning of the Hebrew word for “heart” includes the mind.
The mental activities of the metaphorical heart are abundant. The heart is where a person thinks (Gen. 6:5; Deut. 7:17; 1Chron. 29:18; Rev. 18:7), where a person comprehends and has understanding (1Kings 3:9; Job 17:4; Ps. 49:3; Prov. 14:13; Matt. 13:15). The heart makes plans and has intentions (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Prov. 20:5; 1Chron. 29:18; Jer. 23:20). One believes with the heart (Luke 24:25; Acts 8:37; Rom. 10:9). The heart is the site of wisdom, discernment, and skill (Exod. 35:34; 36:2; 1Kings 3:9; 10:24). The heart is the place of memory (Deut. 4:9; Ps. 119:11). The heart plays the role of conscience (2Sam. 24:10; 1John 3:2021).
It is often worth the effort to substitute “mind” for “heart” when reading the Bible in order to grasp the mental dimension. For example, after telling the Israelites to love God with all their heart, Moses says, “These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts” (Deut. 6:6). Reading it instead as “be on your mind” changes our perspective, and in this case the idiom “on your mind” is clearer and more accurate. The following verses instruct parents to talk to their children throughout the day about God’s words. In order for parents to do this, God’s requirements and deeds need to be constantly on their minds, out of their love for him. Similarly, love for God and loyalty are expressed by meditation on and determination to obey his law (Ps. 119:11, 112). The law is not merely a list of rules; it is also a repository of a worldview in which the Lord is the only God. To live consistently with this truth requires careful, reflective thought.
Emotions and attitude. The heart, as the seat of emotion, is associated with a number of feelings and sentiments, such as gladness (Exod. 4:14; Acts 2:26), hatred (Lev. 19:17), pride (Deut. 8:14), resentment (Deut. 15:10), dread (Deut. 28:67), sympathy (Judg. 5:9), love (Judg. 16:15), sadness (1Sam. 1:8; John 16:6), and jealousy and ambition (James 3:14). The heart is also the frame of reference for attitudes such as willingness, courage, and desire.
The central city and capital of ancient Israel. Throughout its history, the city has also been referred to variously as Zion, Jebus, Mount Moriah, and the City of David.
The name “Jerusalem” occurs more than 650 times in the OT, particularly in the history of Israel, and in the NT more than 140 times. The OT prophets used the city as a symbol of God’s dealing with his people and his plan. Jerusalem is viewed collectively as God’s abode, his chosen place, and his sovereignty, while its destruction is also representative of God’s judgment on apostasy among his people (e.g., Jer. 7:115; 26:18–19; Mic. 3:12). The rebuilding of the city represents the hope and grace of God (e.g., Isa. 40:1–2; 52:1, 7–8; 60–62; Jer. 30:18–19; 31:38–39; Ezek. 5:5; Hag. 2:6–8; Zech. 8:3–8). Like the writers of the OT, the NT authors spoke of Jerusalem in metaphorical and eschatological terms. Paul used Jerusalem to contrast the old and the new covenants (Gal. 4:24–26), and the writer of Hebrews used it as the place of the new covenant, sealed through the blood of Jesus (Heb. 12:22–24). In Revelation the concept of a new Jerusalem is related to the future kingdom of God (Rev. 3:12; 21:1–22:5).
Jerusalem is located in the Judean hill country, about 2,700 feet above sea level. It borders the Judean desert to the east. The city expanded and contracted in size over various hills and valleys. There are two major ridges (Eastern and Western Hills) separated by the Tyropoeon Valley. The Eastern Hill contains a saddle, the Ophel Hill, and north of this is the traditional site of Mount Moriah, where later the temple was constructed. The Eastern Hill was always occupied, since the only water source is the Gihon spring, located in the Kidron Valley. Two other ridges were important for the city, as they were used for extramural suburbs, cemeteries, and quarries. To the east is the Mount of Olives, which is separated from the Eastern Hill by the Kidron Valley. To the west of the Western Hill is the Central Ridge Route, separated by the Hinnom Valley.
The English word “messiah” derives from the Hebrew verb mashakh, which means “to anoint.” The Greek counterpart of the Hebrew word for “messiah” (mashiakh) is christos, which in English is “Christ.”
In English translations of the Bible, the word “messiah” (“anointed one”) occurs rarely in the OT. In the OT, kings, prophets, and priests were “anointed” with oil as a means of consecrating or setting them apart for their respective offices. Prophets and priests anointed Israel’s kings (1Sam. 16:1 13; 2Sam. 2:4, 7).
The expectation for a “messiah,” or “anointed one,” arose from the promise given to David in the Davidic covenant (2Sam. 7). David was promised that from his seed God would raise up a king who would reign forever on his throne. Hopes for such an ideal king began with Solomon and developed further during the decline (cf. Isa. 9:1–7) and especially after the collapse of the Davidic kingdom.
The harsh reality of exile prompted Israel to hope that God would rule in such a manner. A number of psalms reflect the desire that an ideal son of David would come and rule, delivering Israel from its current plight of oppression. Hence, in Ps. 2 God declares that his son (v.7), who is the Lord’s anointed one (v.2), will receive “the nations [as] your inheritance, the ends of the earth your possession” (v.8). God promises that “you will rule them with an iron scepter; you will dash them to pieces like pottery” (v.9; see NIV footnote). Jesus demonstrates great reticence in using the title “Messiah.” In the Synoptic Gospels he almost never explicitly claims it. The two key Synoptic passages where Jesus accepts the title are themselves enigmatic. In Mark’s version of Peter’s confession (8:29), Jesus does not explicitly affirm Peter’s claim, “You are the Messiah,” but instead goes on to speak of the suffering of the Son of Man. Later, Jesus is asked by the high priest Caiaphas at his trial, “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?” (Mark 14:60). In Mark 14:62, Jesus answers explicitly with “I am,” while in Matt. 26:64, he uses the more enigmatic “You have said so.” Jesus then goes on to describe himself as the exalted Son of Man who will sit at Yahweh’s right hand.
Jesus no doubt avoided the title because it risked communicating an inadequate understanding of the kingdom and his messianic role. Although the Messiah was never a purely political figure in Judaism, he was widely expected to destroy Israel’s enemies and secure its physical borders. Psalms of Solomon portrays the coming “son of David” as one who will “destroy the unrighteous rulers” and “purge Jerusalem from Gentiles who trample her to destruction” (Pss. Sol. 17.21–23). To distance himself from such thinking, Jesus never refers to himself as “son of David” and “king of Israel/the Jews” as other characters do in the Gospels (Matt. 12:23; 21:9, 15; Mark 10:47; 15:2; John 1:49; 12:13; 18:33). When Jesus was confronted by a group of Jews who wanted to make him into such a king, he resisted them (John 6:15).
In Mark 12:35–37, Jesus also redefines traditional understandings of the son of David in his short discussion on Ps. 110:1: he is something more than a mere human son of David. Combining Jesus’ implicit affirmation that he is the Messiah in Mark 8:30 with his teaching about the Son of Man in 8:31, we see that Jesus is a Messiah who will “suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests, and the teachers of the law” (8:31) and through whom redemption will come (10:45). Jesus came not to defeat the Roman legions, but to bring victory over Satan, sin, and death.
Moses played a leadership role in the founding of Israel as a “kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exod. 19:6). Indeed, the narrative of Exodus through Deuteronomy is the story of God using Moses to found the nation of Israel. It begins with an account of his birth (Exod. 2) and ends with an account of his death (Deut. 34). Moses’ influence and importance extend well beyond his lifetime, as later Scripture demonstrates.
Moses was born in a dangerous time, and according to Pharaoh’s decree, he should not have survived long after his birth. He was born to Amram and Jochebed (Exod. 6:20). Circumventing Pharaoh’s decree, Jochebed placed the infant Moses in a reed basket and floated him down the river. God guided the basket down the river and into the presence of none other than Pharaoh’s daughter (Exod. 2:56), who, at the urging of Moses’ sister, hired Jochebed to take care of the child.
The next major episode in the life of Moses concerns his defense of an Israelite worker who was being beaten by an Egyptian (Exod. 2:11–25). In the process of rescuing the Israelite, Moses killed the Egyptian. When it became clear that he was known to be the killer, he fled Egypt and ended up in Midian, where he became a member of the family of a Midianite priest-chief, Jethro, by marrying his daughter Zipporah.
Although Moses was not looking for a way back into Egypt, God had different plans. One day, while Moses was tending his sheep, God appeared to him in the form of a burning bush and commissioned him to go back to Egypt and lead his people to freedom. Moses expressed reluctance, and so God grudgingly enlisted his older brother, Aaron, to accompany him as his spokesperson.
Upon Moses’ return to Egypt, Pharaoh stubbornly refused to allow the Israelites to leave Egypt. God directed Moses to announce a series of plagues that ultimately induced Pharaoh to allow the Israelites to depart. After they left, Pharaoh had a change of mind and cornered them on the shores of the Red Sea (Sea of Reeds). It was at the Red Sea that God demonstrated his great power by splitting the sea and allowing the Israelites to escape before closing it again in judgment on the Egyptians. Moses signaled the presence of God by lifting his rod high in the air (Exod. 14:16). This event was long remembered as the defining moment when God released Israel from Egyptian slavery (Pss. 77; 114), and it even became the paradigm for future divine rescues (Isa. 40:3–5; Hos. 2:14–15).
After the crossing of the Red Sea, Moses led Israel back to Mount Sinai, the location of his divine commissioning. At this time, Moses went up the mountain as a prophetic mediator for the people (Deut. 18:16). He received the Ten Commandments, the rest of the law, and instructions to build the tabernacle (Exod. 19–24). All these were part of a new covenantal arrangement that today we refer to as the Mosaic or Sinaitic covenant.
However, as Moses came down the mountain with the law, he saw that the people, who had grown tired of waiting, were worshiping a false god that they had created in the form of a golden calf (Exod. 32). With the aid of the Levites, who that day assured their role as Israel’s priestly helpers, he brought God’s judgment against the offenders and also interceded in prayer with God to prevent the total destruction of Israel.
Thus began Israel’s long story of rebellion against God. God was particularly upset with the lack of confidence that the Israelites had shown when the spies from the twelve tribes gave their report (Num. 13). They did not believe that God could handle the fearsome warriors who lived in the land, and so God doomed them to forty years of wandering in the wilderness, enough time for the first generation to die. Not even Moses escaped this fate, since he had shown anger against God and attributed a miracle to his own power and not to God when he struck a rock in order to get water (Num. 20:1–13).
Thus, Moses was not permitted to enter the land of promise, though he had led the Israelites to the very brink of entry on the plains of Moab. There he gave his last sermon, which we know as the book of Deuteronomy. The purpose of his sermon was to tell the second generation of Israelites who were going to enter the land that they must obey God’s law or suffer the consequences. The form of the sermon was that of a covenant renewal, and so Israel on this occasion reaffirmed its loyalty to God.
After this, Moses went up on Mount Nebo, from which he could see the promised land, and died. Deuteronomy concludes with the following statements: “Since then, no prophet has risen in Israel like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face.... For no one has ever shown the mighty power or performed the awesome deeds that Moses did in the sight of all Israel” (Deut. 34:10, 12).
The NT honors Moses as God’s servant but also makes the point that Jesus is one who far surpasses Moses as a mediator between God and people (Acts 3:17–26; Heb. 3).
The date of Moses is a matter of controversy because the biblical text does not name the pharaohs of the story. Many date him to the thirteenth century BC and associate him with RamessesII, but others take 1Kings 6:1 at face value and date him to the end of the fifteenth century BC, perhaps during the reign of ThutmoseIII.
In the first century, Nazareth was a small village in the extreme southerly part of lower Galilee, midway between the Sea of Galilee and the Mediterranean Sea. It was near Gath Hepher, the birthplace of Jonah the prophet to the Gentiles (2Kings 14:25), and Sepphoris, one of the three largest cities in the region. Not far was the Via Maris, the great highway joining Mesopotamia to Egypt and ultimately the trading network that linked India, China, central Asia, the Near East, and the Mediterranean. The community, whose population may have averaged around five hundred, subsisted from agriculture. Capital resources included almonds, pomegranates, dates, oil, and wine. (Excavations have located vaulted cells for wine and oil storage, as well as wine presses and storage jar vessels.) Nazareth appears to have been uninhabited from the eighth to the second centuries BC, until it was resettled during the reign of John Hyrcanus (134104 BC), probably by a Davidic clan of army veterans. The claim that Jesus’ adoptive father, Joseph, was a descendant of David and a resident of Nazareth is therefore plausible (Matt. 1:20; Luke 2:4–5). Today, Nazareth is the largest Arab city in Israel.
Although Jesus’ ministry was unsuccessful in Nazareth, he and his followers were called “Nazarenes” (Mark 1:24; 10:47; John 18:5, 7; Acts 2:22; 3:6; 24:5). Descendants of Jesus’ family continued to live in the area for centuries. The epithet “Nazarene” probably was intended as a slur. Nathanael is unimpressed by Jesus’ origin in Nazareth (John 1:46). The village is not mentioned in the OT. Some even doubted its existence, until 1962, when the place name “Nazareth” was discovered on a synagogue inscription in Caesarea Maritima.
A priest is a minister of sacred things who represents God to the people and the people to God. The OT identifies priests of Yahweh and priests of other gods and idols. The only pagan priest that the NT mentions is the priest of Zeus from Lystra who wanted to offer sacrifices to Paul and Barnabas, whom the crowd mistook for deities (Acts 14:13). All other NT references build upon OT teaching about priests of Yahweh.
Early biblical history records clan heads offering sacrifices for their families (Gen. 12:78; 13:18; 22; 31:54; 46:1). Although the patriarchs performed these duties, they are never called “priests”; the only priests mentioned from this time are foreigners such as Melchizedek, the Egyptian priest of On, and Moses’ father-in-law Jethro (Gen. 14:18; 41:45, 50; 46:20; Exod. 3:1; 18:1). Whereas all Israelites could be called “a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exod. 19:6), a distinctive priesthood came to light when God instructed Moses to prepare special priestly clothes for Aaron and his sons (Exod. 28). The high priest was distinguished from the others by more magnificent clothes. By failing to wear their special clothes while serving at the tabernacle, the priests would incur guilt and die (Exod. 28:43).
In NT times many priests exerted religious and civil power as leaders of the Sadducees and the Essenes. Some priests, such as Zechariah, were portrayed as righteous men (Luke 1:5–6). Others were said to have come to faith in Jesus (Acts 6:7). Supporting the role assigned by Moses, Jesus regularly required those whom he healed to show themselves to the priest. Even so, most Gospel references to priests underscore their opposition to Jesus’ ministry and the role they played in his trial and crucifixion. This opposition continued after the resurrection, as priests challenged the witness of the apostles. When Peter and John proclaimed that a crippled beggar had been healed by Jesus’ power, the priests and others jailed, interrogated, and forbade them from speaking in Jesus’ name (Acts 4:1–20). The Sanhedrin questioned Stephen about charges of blasphemy and speaking against the temple and the Mosaic law (6:11–7:1). Saul (Paul) received a letter of authority from the high priest to arrest Christians (9:1–2). Later, as a follower of Jesus, he stood trial before Ananias, who charged him before Felix (24:1), and a wider group of chief priests who charged him before Festus (25:1–3).
Hebrews uniquely highlights how the priesthood of Jesus surpassed the OT priesthood. The OT priests presented sin offerings, but their sacrifices needed to be repeated regularly, whereas Jesus, the faithful and merciful high priest, offered a sacrifice that never needed repeating and was available to everyone at all times. Jesus also surpassed the Aaronic priests because they first needed to offer sacrifices for their own sins, but he never sinned. Furthermore, since he offered the perfect sacrifice of himself, all people, not just priests, could draw near to God.
The NT develops the idea of a priesthood of all believers by taking the concept that Israel would be a kingdom of priests and transferring it to the church (1Pet. 2:4–9; cf. Exod. 19:6). Reflecting the general biblical view of priesthood, believers offer spiritual sacrifices to God, represent God to the world by revealing his works of salvation, and represent the world to God through prayer. In the NT, the priesthood of believers is corporate; a priestly office in the church is never expressly mentioned.
A prophet is a messenger of God, a person to whom God entrusts his message to an individual or to a nation. Indeed, the last book in the OT is named “Malachi,” which means “my messenger.” Isaiah heard God ask, “Whom shall I send?” and he cried out, “Send me!” (Isa. 6:8). A good template for understanding the phenomenon is Moses and Aaron. Moses was to tell Aaron what to say, and Aaron would say it. “Then the Lord said to Moses, ‘See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron will be your prophet’” (Exod. 7:1).
In the NT period there were a number of prophets. John the Baptist could point to Jesus and proclaim him to be the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29). Agabus the prophet predicted a famine and, later, Paul’s arrest (Acts 11:28; 21:1011).
Paul lists “gifts of the Spirit” (1Cor. 12:4–11), including prophecy and various phenomena reminiscent of the OT prophets’ ecstatic state. Paul warns the Corinthians not to overdo this sort of thing and so to be mature (1Cor. 14:19–20). Near the end of his life, in one of his last letters, he speaks of prophecy as normative in the church, particularly in establishing an authoritative body of elders to rule and especially to preach the gospel (1Tim. 1:18; 4:14). Peter draws a connection between the ministry of the OT prophets and the proclamation of the gospel of Jesus Christ (1Pet. 1:10–12). Evangelism seems to be the normative mode for prophecy today: forthtelling by calling people to turn from their sins to Jesus, and foretelling by speaking of his return and the final judgment.
Thus, all Christians hold the office of prophet, even if they never participate in the ecstatic state experienced by the Corinthians. The greatness of a prophet is in how clearly the prophet points to Jesus. John the Baptist was the greatest of the OT prophets by that measure, but any Christian on this side of the cross and resurrection can proclaim the gospel even more clearly. Thus, the prophetic ministry of any Christian is greater than John’s (Matt. 11:11).
Five prophetesses are mentioned in the OT: Miriam (Exod. 15:20), Deborah (Judg. 4–5), Huldah (2Kings 22:14–20; 2Chron. 34:22–28), Isaiah’s wife (Isa. 8:3), and Noadiah (Neh. 6:14).
Similarly in the NT, Peter recognizes God’s promise through Joel being fulfilled in the gift of prophetic speech to women as well as men at Pentecost (Acts 2:18); and Paul, acknowledging that women prophesy publicly in the congregation, is concerned only with the manner of their doing so (1Cor. 11:5). The prophetess Anna proclaims the baby Jesus as the Messiah (Luke 2:36–38), Luke reports that the four unmarried daughters of Philip the evangelist also prophesy (Acts 21:8–9). The only false prophetess in the NT is the apocalyptic figure of Jezebel in Rev. 2:20.
More than a simple notion of deliverance, redemption spoke as much of the grace of the redeemer as of the deliverance of the redeemed. Classical texts use the Greek word apolytrōsis (“redemption”) to articulate the ransom payment given to release a slave, a captive of war, or someone sentenced to death. The group of words based on the Greek term lytron (“ransom”) conveys the idea of payment for release. The corresponding Hebrew word padah is a commercial term rooted in the idea of the transfer of ownership.
The experience of the exodus gave the idea of redemption religious significance. The commemoration of this redemptive event included the dedication of the firstborn to Yahweh (Exod. 13:1213). Moreover, Israel itself, God’s own firstborn (Exod. 4:22), was redeemed by Yahweh—language that Isaiah later picked up to describe Abraham (Isa. 29:22). As the theme of redemption continued to broaden, God’s redemption came to include deliverance from all Israel’s troubles (Ps. 25:22). Redemption included the whole of the human situation, not just the eternal destiny (or the new age to come).
The NT champions the theme of redemption (see Luke 4:18–19). When Jesus came, teaching that he would redeem his people from the slavery of sin (John 8:34–36), he spoke of himself as a ransom for many (Matt. 20:28// Mark 10:45). Paul’s theology of the cross accentuated the same connection between sin, slavery, and Jesus’ ransom. He saw people as sold into slavery under sin (Rom. 6:17; 7:14) and redeemed by Jesus’ sacrifice (3:24). The Christian idea of ransom followed the accepted contemporary idea that people who are sentenced to death (Rom. 6:23) can gain their life back if a redeemer buys it with a ransom (Col. 1:13–14).
Although redemption is present, the fullness of it still awaits the future (Rom. 8:18–23), when the redeemer will fill all in all (1Cor. 15:28; Col. 1:19–20). Contrary to Hellenistic conceptions of redemption, which expect redemption from the body, Paul expects redemption of the body. God’s eschatological redemption is universal; it restores the relationship between creation and the Creator (Col. 1:21–23; Eph. 1:7–10).
(1)One of the original twelve apostles (Matt. 10:2), also called “Peter.” Simon Peter was the brother of Andrew and a fisherman by trade (Matt. 4:18). (See also Peter.) (2)The Zealot, one of the original twelve apostles (Matt. 10:4). (3)One of the brothers of Jesus, along with James, Joseph, and Judas (Matt. 13:55; Mark 6:3). (4)A leper who lived in Bethany. In his house the precious bottle of ointment was poured upon Jesus in preparation for his burial (Matt. 26:6). (5)A man from Cyrene who carried Jesus’ cross on the way to crucifixion (Matt. 27:32). (6)A Pharisee who invited Jesus for a meal (Luke 7:40). Jesus was anointed with ointment in his house. He perhaps is the same individual as in Matt. 26:6. (7)The father of Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Jesus (John 6:71). (8)A sorcerer who believed the gospel and was baptized. However, he became enamored with the miraculous power of Philip and with the ability of the apostles to impart the Holy Spirit, and he offered them money to give him that ability (Acts 8:925). (9)A tanner with whom Peter stayed in Joppa before traveling to the house of Cornelius (Acts 9:43).
While in the OT suffering is regularly an indication of divine displeasure (Lev. 26:1636; Deut. 28:20–68; Ps. 44:10–12; Isa. 1:25; cf. Heb. 10:26–31), in the NT it becomes the means by which blessing comes to humanity.
The Bible often shows that sinfulness results in suffering (Gen. 2:17; 6:5–7; Exod. 32:33; 2Sam. 12:13–18; Rom. 1:18; 1Cor. 11:27–30). Job’s friends mistakenly assume that he has suffered because of disobedience (Job 4:7–9; 8:3–4, 20; 11:6). Job passionately defends himself (12:4; 23:10), and in the final chapter of the book God commends Job and condemns his friends for their accusations (42:7–8; cf. 1:1, 22; 2:10). The writer makes clear that suffering is not necessarily evidence of sinfulness. Like Job’s friends, Jesus’ disciples assume that blindness is an indication of sinfulness (John 9:1–2). Jesus rejects this simplistic notion of retributive suffering (John 9:3, 6–7; cf. Luke 13:1–5).
The NT writers reveal that Jesus’ suffering was prophesied in the OT (Mark 9:12; 14:21; Luke 18:31–32; 24:46; Acts 3:18; 17:3; 26:22–23; 1Pet. 1:11; referring to OT texts such as Ps. 22; Isa. 52:13–53:12; Zech. 13:7). The Lord Jesus is presented as the answer to human suffering: (1)Through the incarnation, God’s Son personally experienced human suffering (Phil. 2:6–8; Heb. 2:9; 5:8). (2)Through his suffering, Christ paid the price for sin (Rom. 4:25; 3:25–26), so that believers are set free from sin (Rom. 6:6, 18, 22) and helped in temptation (Heb. 2:18). (3)Christ Jesus intercedes for his suffering followers (Rom. 8:34–35). (4)Christ is the example in suffering (1Pet. 2:21; 4:1; cf. Phil. 3:10; 2Cor. 1:5; 4:10; 1Pet. 4:13), and though he died once for sins (Heb. 10:12), he continues to suffer as his church suffers (Acts 9:4–5). (5)Christ provides hope of resurrection (Rom. 6:5; 1Cor. 15:20–26; Phil. 3:10–11) and a future life without suffering or death (Rev. 21:4).
The NT writers repeatedly mention the benefits of suffering, for it has become part of God’s work of redemption. The suffering of believers accompanies the proclamation and advancement of the gospel (Acts 5:41–42; 9:15–16; 2Cor. 4:10–11; 6:2–10; Phil. 1:12, 27–29; 1Thess. 2:14–16; 2Tim. 1:8; 4:5) and results in salvation (Matt. 10:22; 2Cor. 1:6; 1Thess. 2:16; 2Tim. 2:10; Heb. 10:39), faith (Heb. 10:32–34, 38–39; 1Pet. 1:7), the kingdom of God (Acts 14:22), resurrection from the dead (Phil. 3:10–11), and the crown of life (Rev. 2:10). It is an essential part of the development toward Christian maturity (Rom. 5:3–4; 2Cor. 4:11; Heb. 12:4; James 1:3–4; 1Pet. 1:7; 4:1).
Suffering is associated with knowing Christ (Phil. 3:10); daily inward renewal (2Cor. 4:16); purity, understanding, patience, kindness, sincere love, truthful speech, the power of God (2Cor. 4:4–10); comfort and endurance (2Cor. 1:6); obedience (Heb. 5:8); blessing (1Pet. 3:14; 4:14); glory (Rom. 8:17; 2Cor. 4:17); and joy (Matt. 5:12; Acts 5:41; 2Cor. 6:10; 12:10; James 1:2; 1Pet. 1:6; 4:13). Other positive results of Christian suffering include perseverance (Rom. 5:3; James 1:3), character and hope (Rom. 5:4), strength (2Cor. 12:10), and maturity and completeness (James 1:4). Present suffering is light and momentary when compared to future glory (Matt. 5:10–12; Acts 14:22; Rom. 8:18; 2Cor. 4:17; Heb. 10:34–36; 1Pet. 1:5–7; 4:12–13).
Throughout the Bible, believers are instructed to help those who suffer. The OT law provides principles for assisting the poor, the disadvantaged, and the oppressed (Exod. 20:10; 21:2; 23:11; Lev. 19:13, 34; 25:10, 35; Deut. 14:28–29; 15:1–2; 24:19–21). Jesus regularly taught his followers to help the poor (Matt. 5:42; 6:3; 19:21; 25:34–36; Luke 4:18; 12:33; 14:13, 21). It is believers’ responsibility to show mercy (Matt. 5:7; 9:13), be generous (Rom. 12:8; 2Cor. 8:7; 1Tim. 6:18), mourn with mourners (Rom. 12:15), carry other’s burdens (Gal. 6:1–2), and visit prisoners (Matt. 25:36, 43). See also Servant of the Lord.
A divine communication in the form of visual imagery, usually accompanied by words, and often using symbols that require explanation and spur reflection about God’s otherwise imperceptible presence and activity. Presumably, the recipient “sees” the vision as an event of inward perception, often within a dream during sleep or in a divinely induced state of ecstasy (Gen. 15; Dan. 7:1; 10:19; 2Cor. 12:1–4). Characteristically, visions entail conversation with God or an angelic representative, often following a question-and-answer format (Dan. 7:15–28; Zech. 1:8–15, 18–21). The visionary is actually in the scene as direct observer and active participant (Dan. 8:1–2).
Prophetic visions are meant to be retold. For example, imagery is accompanied by the authentication of divine commissioning (Isa. 6; Ezek. 1:1–3:15; Rev. 10), leading to announcement of judgment (Jer. 1:4–19). This close conjunction of image and word (1Sam. 3:21) is reinforced by statements about a prophet “seeing” God’s word (e.g., Mic. 1:1 ESV, NRSV, NASB) and about prophetic books as collections of visions (2Chron. 32:32; Nah. 1:1). Vision reports join oracles and other forms of prophetic speech as essential features of these works. Visions contribute to the community’s spiritual well-being (Prov. 29:18; Ezek. 7:26), but not always (Lam. 2:14; Ezek. 13; Zech. 13:4; Col. 2:18).
Visions drive the narrative surrounding Jesus’ birth (Matt. 1:18–2:23; Luke 1:1–2:20). The baptism of Jesus includes a visionary element, the Holy Spirit’s anointing of Jesus for his ministry, accompanied by the Father’s word (Matt. 3:16–17; Mark 1:10–11; Luke 3:22; John 1:32–33). Jesus’ transfiguration is comparable (Matt. 17:1–9; Mark 9:2–10; Luke 9:28–36). Visions mark key transition points in the narrative of Acts (e.g., chaps. 9–11). The book of Revelation opens with a vision of the Son of Man (1:9–20) and is structured around three vision cycles of judgment interspersed with visions of heaven meant to bolster the readers’ faithfulness.
“Word” is used in the Bible to refer to the speech of God in oral, written, or incarnate form. In each of these uses, God desires to make himself known to his people. The communication of God is always personal and relational, whether he speaks to call things into existence (Gen. 1) or to address an individual directly (Gen. 2:1617; Exod. 3:14). The prophets and the apostles received the word of God (Deut. 18:14–22; John 16:13), some of which was proclaimed but not recorded. The greatest revelation in this regard is the person of Jesus Christ, who is called the “Word” of God (John 1:1, 14).
The psalmist declared God’s word to be an eternal object of hope and trust that gives light and direction (Ps. 119), and Jesus declared the word to be truth (John 17:17). The word is particularized and intimately connected with God himself by means of the key phrases “your word,” “the word of God,” “the word of the Lord,” “word about Christ,” and “the word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17; Col. 3:16). Our understanding of the word is informed by a variety of terms and contexts in the canon of Scripture, a collection of which is found in Ps. 119.
The theme of the word in Ps. 119 is continued and clarified in the NT, accentuating the intimate connection between the word of God and God himself. The “Word” of God is the eternal Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:1; 1John 1:1–4), who took on flesh and blood so that we might see the glory of the eternal God. The sovereign glory of Christ as the Word of God is depicted in the vision of John in Rev. 19:13. As the Word of God, Jesus Christ ultimately gives us our lives (John 1:4; 6:33; 10:10), sustains our lives (John 5:24; 6:51, 54; 8:51), and ultimately renders a just judgment regarding our lives (John 5:30; 8:16, 26; 9:39; cf. Matt. 25:31–33; Heb. 4:12).
Direct Matches
The human body has its origin in the act of creation by Goddepicted in Gen. 2:7, so that it comes under the heading of the “verygood” evaluation at the close of the six days of creation(1:31). In neither the OT nor the NT is the body viewed as evil, incontrast to the ancient Greek view that saw the human body as aprison of the soul and viewed death as a release from this bondage.This contributes to the Bible’s positive view of humansexuality when properly expressed in a committed marriagerelationship, one notable example being the mutual admiration of theman and the woman who are deeply in love in Song of Songs, where wefind a head-to-toe description of the man’s physique (5:10–16)and a corresponding description of the woman’s body (7:1–8).
OldTestament.In the OT, death is regularly described as a returning of the body tothe dust/ground from which it was made (e.g., Gen. 3:19; Ps. 90:3).The dignity of the human body is signaled by the importance of properburial (Deut. 21:22–23), which is a cultic rather than a healthregulation in the OT. The outrage committed by the Philistines on thebodies of Saul and his sons (1 Sam. 31), the deliberatedesecration of tombs (2 Kings 23:16; Amos 2:1), and leaving anenemy unburied are ways of expressing utter contempt. The ensuring ofproper burial (even of strangers) becomes a mark of Jewish piety, asexemplified in Tob. 2:1–10; 12:11–15.
TheHebrew word nepesh (often translated “soul”) can be usedof a dead body (e.g., Lev. 21:11; Num. 6:6; 19:13; Hag. 2:13), thoughthis word has a wide range of meaning (sometimes it means “throat”).This usage is not to be taken as signifying that the soul/bodydistinction is not recognized. On the contrary, in OT teaching “body”(whatever the Hebrew word used) always refers to the physical body,not to the whole human person that is bipartite (body/soul) within anoverall psychophysical unity. The reference in Mic. 6:7 (NIV: “thefruit of my body”) is really to the “womb” (cf.Deut. 28:4), and the Hebrew word in question, beten, can refer to amale body insofar as it is involved in procreation (Ps. 132:11).
NewTestament.Hebrews insists on the real humanity of Jesus (2:14–18), andthe Gospels portray him as having the normal physical requirements ofdrink, food, and sleep (Mark 4:38; John 4:7–8). To deny thatJesus Christ came “in the flesh” strikes at the heart ofthe gospel and is the spirit of the antichrist (1 John 4:2–3).For atonement to take place, it was required that Jesus offer himselfbody and soul to God through death (Heb. 10:5–10, 20). At theLast Supper, when Jesus said, “This is my body” (Matt.26:26), his meaning was that the bread represented his body, whichwould be offered on the cross as the sacrifice that makes possiblethe inauguration of the new covenant (cf. Exod. 24:1–8).
Thebodily resurrection of Jesus is evidenced by the empty tomb (Mark16:4–6) and the appearance of the risen Christ to his followers(e.g., Luke 24:36–43; see the list of witnesses in 1 Cor.15:5–8). This is a fundamental point of Christian doctrine andgospel proclamation, providing assurance to believers that they toowill be physically raised from the dead (1 Cor. 15:42–52),a belief found already in the OT (Dan. 12:2). Salvation in the Bibleembraces the redemption of the body and the renewal of the physicalcreation. At the time of Christ’s return, believers will beraised from their graves and meet their returning Lord (1 Thess.4:13–18).
Inwhat is acknowledged by all to be a difficult passage (2 Cor.5:1–9), Paul appears to envisage that at the point of death hewill not become a disembodied soul but instead will “be clothedwith [his] heavenly dwelling” (5:4). The expression “awayfrom the body” (5:8) is not to be taken as an indication ofbodiless existence, but rather is explained by “at home withthe Lord” and refers to the believer’s state upon leavingthis earthly life. The nature of the “spiritual body” in1 Cor. 15:35–49 is only hinted at by means of analogies(e.g., the seed) or contrasts (between the “perishable”and the “imperishable”), but its physicality (thoughgloriously transformed) is plain. Perhaps our clearest indication isprovided by what we are told of the resurrection body of Jesus, whichcould pass through grave clothes (Luke 24:12; John 20:5–7),appear and disappear in a closed room (Luke 24:31, 36), and ingestfood and be touched (Luke 24:37–43).
Paulmade use the “body” analogy for the character of thechurch as the “body of Christ” (1 Cor. 12:12–26),viewing it as an organism consisting of different, mutually dependentmembers or organs. This teaching was designed to rebuke and correctthe self-glorifying and self-serving use and abuse of spiritual giftsin the Corinthian church. So too, the reality of the Christiancommunity as a “body” (1 Cor. 10:17; 11:29) showedthat their uncaring attitude toward each other manifested at theirsuppers was totally inappropriate. In the same letter Paul says thatthe believer’s “body” is united to Christ, makingsexual immorality a thing to be shunned (6:12–20). Believersare to glorify God in their bodies. The analogy of the body is used alittle differently in Ephesians (1:23; 2:16) and Colossians (1:18,24), where its point is that Christ is the “head” of thebody (the church), which therefore must submit to his direction andrule. Believers are to present their “bodies” as aliving sacrifice, serving the master who redeemed them (Rom.12:1). The verse that follows gives the other side to theequation: serving God with the mind (12:2). Body and mind togethermake up the complete human being, who is a psychosomatic unity. Seealso Gestures.
Jesus Christ is the centerpiece of the Christian Scriptures. The meaning and interpretation of both Testaments is properly grasped only in light of the person and work of Jesus Christ. That is not to say that the Testaments testify to Jesus Christ in the exact same way; they obviously do not, but both Testaments are part of the inscripturated revelation that, in light of the incarnation, proclaims Jesus Christ to be the fullest manifestation of God given to humankind.
Old Testament
According to the Scriptures. The early Christians were adamant that the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ happened “according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:3–4), which meant that these events lined up with Israel’s sacred traditions. On the road to Emmaus the risen Jesus explained to the two travelers the things concerning himself “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” in relation to the death and glorification of the Messiah (Luke 24:27). In one of the major Johannine discourses, Jesus tells the Pharisees that the Scriptures “testify about me” (John 5:39). Early Christian authors could find certain key texts that demonstrated the conformity of the Christ-event to the pattern of Israel’s Scriptures, such as Pss. 2; 110; 118; Isa. 53. Yet much of the OT can be understood without mention of Jesus Christ in relation to its own historical context, and there is the danger of overly allegorizing OT texts in order to make them say something about Jesus Christ and the church.
The relationship between the Testaments. The way that the NT authors echo, allude to, quote, and interpret the OT is a complex matter, but at least two points need to be made about the relationship between the two Testaments.
First, the OT anticipates and illuminates the coming of Jesus Christ. “Anticipate” does not mean “predict,” but the law and the prophets foreshadow the offices and identity of Jesus Christ. The offices of prophet, priest, and king in the OT prefigure the ministry of Christ, who is the one who reveals God, intercedes on behalf of humankind, and is the Messiah and Lord. The sacrificial cultus, with the necessity of shedding blood for the removal of sin, prefigures the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ. This is why the law is a “shadow” of the one who was to come (Col. 2:17; Heb. 10:1). “Illuminate” means that certain OT texts, though not referring to Jesus in their historical or literary context, explain aspects of his person and work. This is seen most clearly in the way that the psalms are used in the NT. Texts such as Pss. 2:7; 110:1–4 provided biblical categories that explained the nature of Jesus’ sonship, the quality of his priestly ministry, and his installation as God’s vice-regent.
Second, we should differentiate between prophecy and typology. The prophetic promises in Ezek. 37; Amos 9; and Mic. 4 about a future Davidic king whom God will use to save and restore Israel are genuine prophecies that look forward to a future event yet to be fulfilled. These texts set forth the job description of the Messiah as the renewal and restoration of Israel from bondage and exile. It is unsurprising then that in Acts, James the brother of Jesus could cite Amos 9:11–12 as proof that Gentiles should be accepted into the people of God with the coming of the Messiah (Acts 15:15–18).
Typological interpretation, on the other hand, sees OT persons, places, or events as prototypes or patterns of NT persons, places, or events. For example, in Rom. 5:14 Paul says that Adam is a “type” or “pattern” of the one to come. Similarly, Matthew’s use of Isa. 7:14 in Matt. 1:23 is also typological rather than prophetic. In the context of Isaiah, the promise refers to a child born during the reign of King Ahaz as a sign that the Judean kingdom will survive the Assyrian onslaught. Matthew’s citation does not demand an exact correspondence of events as much as it postulates a correlation of patterns or types between Isaiah’s narrative and the Matthean birth story. The coming of God’s Son, the manifestation of God’s presence, and the rescue of Israel through a child born to a young girl bring to Matthew’s mind Isa. 7 as an obvious prophetic precedent, repeated at a new juncture of redemptive history.
A Christology of the Old Testament. The NT authors interpreted the OT in search of answers to questions pertaining to the identity and ministry of Jesus Christ, the nature of the people of God, and the arrival of the new age. They detected patterns in the OT that were repeated or recapitulated in Jesus’ own person. They proclaimed that the prophetic promises made to Israel had been made good in Jesus Christ, and they found allusions to the various events of his life, death, and exaltation. Jesus and Israel’s Scriptures became a mutually interpretive spiral whereby the Christians began to understand the OT in light of Jesus and understood Jesus in light of the OT. In this canonical setting we can legitimately develop a “Christology of the Old Testament.”
New Testament
The Gospels. The canonical Gospels are four ancient biographies that pay attention to the history and significance of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. They represent a testimony to Jesus and embody the collective memory of his person and actions as they were transmitted and interpreted by Christians in the Greco-Roman world of the mid- to late first century.
All four Gospels follow the same basic outline by variably detailing Jesus’ ministry, passion, and exaltation, and all of them place the story of Jesus in the context of the fulfillment of the story of Israel. At the same time, each Gospel in its plot and portrayal of Jesus remains distinctive in its own right. Yet they are not four different Jesuses, but rather four parallel portraits of Jesus, much like four stained-glass windows or four paintings depict the same person in different ways.
The Gospel of Matthew portrays Jesus as the long-awaited Davidic Messiah of Israel, with a focus on his teaching authority as a type of new Moses. The Gospel of Mark describes Jesus as the powerful Son of God and concurrently as the suffering Son of Man, whose cross reveals the reality of his identity and mission. The Gospel of Luke emphasizes Jesus’ role as an anointed prophet with a special concern for the poor and outcasts and his role as dispenser of the Holy Spirit. Without flattening the distinctive christological shape of each of the Synoptic Gospels, we could say that they focus on Jesus as the proclaimer of the kingdom of God and as king of the very same kingdom.
The Gospel of John has its own set of characteristic emphases in which Jesus’ consciousness of his divine nature and purpose is heightened. Programmatic for the entirety of John’s Gospel is the prologue in 1:1–18 about the “Word [who] became flesh,” which gives a clear theology of incarnation and revelation associated with Jesus’ coming. There is also much material unique to John’s Gospel, such as the “I am” statements that further exposit the nature of Jesus’ person and the climactic confession by Thomas that Jesus is “my Lord and my God” (20:28).
The Gospels indicate that mere knowledge that Jesus died for the purpose of salvation is an insufficient understanding of him. What is also needed, and what they provide, is an understanding of his teachings and his mission in light of Israel’s Scriptures and in view of the sociopolitical situation of Palestine. Jesus came to redeem and renew Israel so that a transformed Israel would transform the world.
Acts. The book of Acts contains the story of the emergence of the early church from Jerusalem to Rome. Even though Acts is a repository of apostolic preaching and plots the beginnings of the Gentile mission, it is the sequel to Luke’s Gospel and is very much the story of Jesus in perfect tense (i.e., a past event with ongoing significance). The most succinct summary of the Christology of Acts is in Peter’s speech in Jerusalem, where he states that “this Jesus” whom they crucified has been made both “Lord and Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” by God (2:36). In the succeeding narratives emphasis is given to “Jesus is the Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” (e.g., 9:22; 17:3; 18:5), which is a message pertinent to Jews and Gentiles (20:21).
Paul’s Letters. The Pauline Epistles, although they are situational, pastoral, and not given primarily to christological exposition, still exhibit beliefs about Jesus held by Paul and his Christian contemporaries. The high points of Paul’s Christology can be detected in his use of traditional material such as Col. 1:15–20, which exposits the sufficiency and the supremacy of Christ. Philippians 2:5–11 narrates the story of the incarnation as an example of self-giving love. In 1 Cor. 8:6 Paul offers a Christianized version of the Shema of Deut. 6:4. There is a petition to Jesus as “Come, Lord!” in 1 Cor. 16:22. Paul can also refer to Jesus as God in Rom. 9:5 (although the grammar is ambiguous). For Paul, Jesus is both the “heavenly man” (1 Cor. 15:47–49) and the Son to come from heaven (1 Thess. 1:10). This interest in the divine Son of God does not mean that Paul was ignorant of or disinterested in the life and teachings of Jesus. Elsewhere he implies knowledge of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Rom. 14:14; 1 Cor. 7:10–11) and refers to the incarnation (e.g., 2 Cor. 8:9; Col. 2:9).
A number of titles are used to describe Jesus in Paul’s letters, including “Lord” and “Christ/Messiah” (and variations such as “Lord Jesus Christ” and “Christ Jesus”), “Savior,” and “Seed of David” (Rom. 1:3). But probably the most apt expression of Jesus’ nature according to Paul is “Son of God” (e.g., Rom. 1:4; 2 Cor. 1:19; Gal. 2:20). This language of sonship suggests that Jesus is the means of God’s salvation and glory and is the special agent through whom the Father acts. Referring to Jesus as “Son” also underscores Jesus’ unique relationship to God the Father and his unique role in executing the ordained plan of salvation for the elect.
We might also add that Paul provides the building blocks of what would later become a full-blown trinitarian theology, such as in the benediction of 2 Cor. 13:14 and in general exhortations about the gospel (1 Cor. 2:1–5). It must be emphasized that Paul’s Christology cannot be separated from his eschatology, soteriology, and ecclesiology. The sending of God’s Son (see Rom. 8:3; Gal. 4:4–5) into the world marks the coming of redemption and salvation through the cross and resurrection of the Son, and these are appropriated by faith. Those who believe become members of the restored Israel, the renewed Adamic race, and constituent members of the body of Christ. To that we might add the experiential element of Paul’s Christology as Jesus is known in the experience of salvation, prayer, and worship (e.g., Gal. 2:19–20).
The General Letters. The General Letters (also called the Catholic Epistles) provide a further array of images and explorations into the person and work of Jesus Christ and how they relate to the community of faith. The message of Hebrews is essentially “Jesus is better!” He is better than the angels and better than Moses; he is a better high priest; he offers a better sacrifice, establishes a better law, and instigates a better covenant. This letter is a sermonic exhortation against falling away from the faith (e.g., 2:1–4), and toward that end the author sets before his readers the magnificence of Jesus Christ, who is “the same yesterday and today and forever” (13:8).
James has little christological content and focuses instead on exhortations that bear remarkable resemblance to the teachings of Jesus from the Gospels. Even so, the letter makes passing reference to the “glorious Lord Jesus Christ” (2:1; cf. 1:1).
Central to 1 Peter is the glory and salvation that will be manifested at the revelation of Jesus Christ at his second coming (1:5, 7, 9, 13; 4:13; 5:1). Much attention is given to Jesus’ sacrificial death as a lamb (1:19), the example of his suffering (2:21–23; 4:1–2, 13), and the substitutionary nature of his death (2:24; 3:18). He is the Shepherd and Overseer of the souls of Christians (2:25). Peter writes this to encourage congregations in Asia Minor living under adverse conditions, and he sets before them the pattern of Jesus as a model for their own journey.
In 2 Peter we find a mix of Jewish eschatological concepts and Hellenistic religious language, with the author seeking to defend the apostolic gospel in a pagan culture. Jesus is the source of knowledge (1:2, 8; 2:20) and righteousness (1:1). Much emphasis is given to the coming kingdom of Jesus Christ (1:11, 16; 3:10). Jesus is the sustainer and renewer of the church and also the coming judge of the entire world.
Similar themes can be found in Jude, which is addressed to a group of believers who have been infiltrated by false teachers promoting licentiousness. Jude declares the infiltrators to be condemned and calls on the believers to hold fast to the faith. Jesus is the “Sovereign and Lord” (v. 4), Jesus saved people out of Egypt during the exodus (v. 5 [but see marginal notes on the variant reading “Lord”]), the second coming of Jesus will mark the revelation of his “mercy” (v. 21), and the benediction ascribes “glory, majesty, power and authority” to God through Jesus (v. 25). Most characteristic of all is the emphasis upon Jesus/God as the one who keeps the believers in the grip of his saving power (vv. 1, 21, 23).
The Letters of John take up where the Gospel of John left off, focusing on Jesus as the incarnate Word of God. The first of the three Johannine Epistles appears to have been written in a context where a community of Christians was being pressured by Jews to deny that Jesus is the Messiah (2:22) and also by dissident docetists to deny that Jesus had a physical body (4:2; 5:6). The major focus, however, is on Jesus as the Son of God (1:3, 7; 2:23; 3:8, 23; 4:9–10, 15; 5:11) and the incarnation of God’s very own truth and love (3:16; cf. 2 John 3).
Revelation. The Christology of the book of Revelation is best summed up in the opening description of Jesus as “him who is, and who was, and who is to come,” which underscores the lordship of Jesus over the past, present, and future. John then describes Jesus with the threefold titles “the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth” (1:4–5). In many ways, the story and Christology of Revelation are paradoxical. Jesus is both the victim of Roman violence and the victor over human evil. Jesus is the suffering “Lamb of God” and the powerful “Lion of the tribe of Judah.” In Rev. 4–5 we are given a picture of the worship in heaven and the enthronement of Jesus, and yet the realities on earth are a dearth of heavenly goodness, with persecution and apostasy rampant (Rev. 1–3). This tension continues until the final revelation of Jesus, when the heavenly Lord returns to bring the goodness and power of heaven to transform the perils of the earth and bring his people into the new Jerusalem.
Summary
The primary fixtures of a biblical Christology are (1) Jesus Christ is the promised deliverer intimated in Israel’s Scriptures, whose identity and mission are anticipated and illuminated by the law and the prophets; (2) the man Jesus of Nazareth is identified with the risen and exalted Lord Jesus Christ; and (3) Jesus participates in the very identity and being of God. See also Jesus Christ.
The disciple in conversation with a companion on the road toEmmaus, where they were joined by the risen Jesus (Luke 24:13–35).The name is a shortened form of “Cleopatros” and may be aGreek version of the Semitic “Clopas” (see John 19:25).
Jesus Christ is the centerpiece of the Christian Scriptures. The meaning and interpretation of both Testaments is properly grasped only in light of the person and work of Jesus Christ. That is not to say that the Testaments testify to Jesus Christ in the exact same way; they obviously do not, but both Testaments are part of the inscripturated revelation that, in light of the incarnation, proclaims Jesus Christ to be the fullest manifestation of God given to humankind.
Old Testament
According to the Scriptures. The early Christians were adamant that the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ happened “according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:3–4), which meant that these events lined up with Israel’s sacred traditions. On the road to Emmaus the risen Jesus explained to the two travelers the things concerning himself “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” in relation to the death and glorification of the Messiah (Luke 24:27). In one of the major Johannine discourses, Jesus tells the Pharisees that the Scriptures “testify about me” (John 5:39). Early Christian authors could find certain key texts that demonstrated the conformity of the Christ-event to the pattern of Israel’s Scriptures, such as Pss. 2; 110; 118; Isa. 53. Yet much of the OT can be understood without mention of Jesus Christ in relation to its own historical context, and there is the danger of overly allegorizing OT texts in order to make them say something about Jesus Christ and the church.
The relationship between the Testaments. The way that the NT authors echo, allude to, quote, and interpret the OT is a complex matter, but at least two points need to be made about the relationship between the two Testaments.
First, the OT anticipates and illuminates the coming of Jesus Christ. “Anticipate” does not mean “predict,” but the law and the prophets foreshadow the offices and identity of Jesus Christ. The offices of prophet, priest, and king in the OT prefigure the ministry of Christ, who is the one who reveals God, intercedes on behalf of humankind, and is the Messiah and Lord. The sacrificial cultus, with the necessity of shedding blood for the removal of sin, prefigures the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ. This is why the law is a “shadow” of the one who was to come (Col. 2:17; Heb. 10:1). “Illuminate” means that certain OT texts, though not referring to Jesus in their historical or literary context, explain aspects of his person and work. This is seen most clearly in the way that the psalms are used in the NT. Texts such as Pss. 2:7; 110:1–4 provided biblical categories that explained the nature of Jesus’ sonship, the quality of his priestly ministry, and his installation as God’s vice-regent.
Second, we should differentiate between prophecy and typology. The prophetic promises in Ezek. 37; Amos 9; and Mic. 4 about a future Davidic king whom God will use to save and restore Israel are genuine prophecies that look forward to a future event yet to be fulfilled. These texts set forth the job description of the Messiah as the renewal and restoration of Israel from bondage and exile. It is unsurprising then that in Acts, James the brother of Jesus could cite Amos 9:11–12 as proof that Gentiles should be accepted into the people of God with the coming of the Messiah (Acts 15:15–18).
Typological interpretation, on the other hand, sees OT persons, places, or events as prototypes or patterns of NT persons, places, or events. For example, in Rom. 5:14 Paul says that Adam is a “type” or “pattern” of the one to come. Similarly, Matthew’s use of Isa. 7:14 in Matt. 1:23 is also typological rather than prophetic. In the context of Isaiah, the promise refers to a child born during the reign of King Ahaz as a sign that the Judean kingdom will survive the Assyrian onslaught. Matthew’s citation does not demand an exact correspondence of events as much as it postulates a correlation of patterns or types between Isaiah’s narrative and the Matthean birth story. The coming of God’s Son, the manifestation of God’s presence, and the rescue of Israel through a child born to a young girl bring to Matthew’s mind Isa. 7 as an obvious prophetic precedent, repeated at a new juncture of redemptive history.
A Christology of the Old Testament. The NT authors interpreted the OT in search of answers to questions pertaining to the identity and ministry of Jesus Christ, the nature of the people of God, and the arrival of the new age. They detected patterns in the OT that were repeated or recapitulated in Jesus’ own person. They proclaimed that the prophetic promises made to Israel had been made good in Jesus Christ, and they found allusions to the various events of his life, death, and exaltation. Jesus and Israel’s Scriptures became a mutually interpretive spiral whereby the Christians began to understand the OT in light of Jesus and understood Jesus in light of the OT. In this canonical setting we can legitimately develop a “Christology of the Old Testament.”
New Testament
The Gospels. The canonical Gospels are four ancient biographies that pay attention to the history and significance of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. They represent a testimony to Jesus and embody the collective memory of his person and actions as they were transmitted and interpreted by Christians in the Greco-Roman world of the mid- to late first century.
All four Gospels follow the same basic outline by variably detailing Jesus’ ministry, passion, and exaltation, and all of them place the story of Jesus in the context of the fulfillment of the story of Israel. At the same time, each Gospel in its plot and portrayal of Jesus remains distinctive in its own right. Yet they are not four different Jesuses, but rather four parallel portraits of Jesus, much like four stained-glass windows or four paintings depict the same person in different ways.
The Gospel of Matthew portrays Jesus as the long-awaited Davidic Messiah of Israel, with a focus on his teaching authority as a type of new Moses. The Gospel of Mark describes Jesus as the powerful Son of God and concurrently as the suffering Son of Man, whose cross reveals the reality of his identity and mission. The Gospel of Luke emphasizes Jesus’ role as an anointed prophet with a special concern for the poor and outcasts and his role as dispenser of the Holy Spirit. Without flattening the distinctive christological shape of each of the Synoptic Gospels, we could say that they focus on Jesus as the proclaimer of the kingdom of God and as king of the very same kingdom.
The Gospel of John has its own set of characteristic emphases in which Jesus’ consciousness of his divine nature and purpose is heightened. Programmatic for the entirety of John’s Gospel is the prologue in 1:1–18 about the “Word [who] became flesh,” which gives a clear theology of incarnation and revelation associated with Jesus’ coming. There is also much material unique to John’s Gospel, such as the “I am” statements that further exposit the nature of Jesus’ person and the climactic confession by Thomas that Jesus is “my Lord and my God” (20:28).
The Gospels indicate that mere knowledge that Jesus died for the purpose of salvation is an insufficient understanding of him. What is also needed, and what they provide, is an understanding of his teachings and his mission in light of Israel’s Scriptures and in view of the sociopolitical situation of Palestine. Jesus came to redeem and renew Israel so that a transformed Israel would transform the world.
Acts. The book of Acts contains the story of the emergence of the early church from Jerusalem to Rome. Even though Acts is a repository of apostolic preaching and plots the beginnings of the Gentile mission, it is the sequel to Luke’s Gospel and is very much the story of Jesus in perfect tense (i.e., a past event with ongoing significance). The most succinct summary of the Christology of Acts is in Peter’s speech in Jerusalem, where he states that “this Jesus” whom they crucified has been made both “Lord and Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” by God (2:36). In the succeeding narratives emphasis is given to “Jesus is the Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” (e.g., 9:22; 17:3; 18:5), which is a message pertinent to Jews and Gentiles (20:21).
Paul’s Letters. The Pauline Epistles, although they are situational, pastoral, and not given primarily to christological exposition, still exhibit beliefs about Jesus held by Paul and his Christian contemporaries. The high points of Paul’s Christology can be detected in his use of traditional material such as Col. 1:15–20, which exposits the sufficiency and the supremacy of Christ. Philippians 2:5–11 narrates the story of the incarnation as an example of self-giving love. In 1 Cor. 8:6 Paul offers a Christianized version of the Shema of Deut. 6:4. There is a petition to Jesus as “Come, Lord!” in 1 Cor. 16:22. Paul can also refer to Jesus as God in Rom. 9:5 (although the grammar is ambiguous). For Paul, Jesus is both the “heavenly man” (1 Cor. 15:47–49) and the Son to come from heaven (1 Thess. 1:10). This interest in the divine Son of God does not mean that Paul was ignorant of or disinterested in the life and teachings of Jesus. Elsewhere he implies knowledge of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Rom. 14:14; 1 Cor. 7:10–11) and refers to the incarnation (e.g., 2 Cor. 8:9; Col. 2:9).
A number of titles are used to describe Jesus in Paul’s letters, including “Lord” and “Christ/Messiah” (and variations such as “Lord Jesus Christ” and “Christ Jesus”), “Savior,” and “Seed of David” (Rom. 1:3). But probably the most apt expression of Jesus’ nature according to Paul is “Son of God” (e.g., Rom. 1:4; 2 Cor. 1:19; Gal. 2:20). This language of sonship suggests that Jesus is the means of God’s salvation and glory and is the special agent through whom the Father acts. Referring to Jesus as “Son” also underscores Jesus’ unique relationship to God the Father and his unique role in executing the ordained plan of salvation for the elect.
We might also add that Paul provides the building blocks of what would later become a full-blown trinitarian theology, such as in the benediction of 2 Cor. 13:14 and in general exhortations about the gospel (1 Cor. 2:1–5). It must be emphasized that Paul’s Christology cannot be separated from his eschatology, soteriology, and ecclesiology. The sending of God’s Son (see Rom. 8:3; Gal. 4:4–5) into the world marks the coming of redemption and salvation through the cross and resurrection of the Son, and these are appropriated by faith. Those who believe become members of the restored Israel, the renewed Adamic race, and constituent members of the body of Christ. To that we might add the experiential element of Paul’s Christology as Jesus is known in the experience of salvation, prayer, and worship (e.g., Gal. 2:19–20).
The General Letters. The General Letters (also called the Catholic Epistles) provide a further array of images and explorations into the person and work of Jesus Christ and how they relate to the community of faith. The message of Hebrews is essentially “Jesus is better!” He is better than the angels and better than Moses; he is a better high priest; he offers a better sacrifice, establishes a better law, and instigates a better covenant. This letter is a sermonic exhortation against falling away from the faith (e.g., 2:1–4), and toward that end the author sets before his readers the magnificence of Jesus Christ, who is “the same yesterday and today and forever” (13:8).
James has little christological content and focuses instead on exhortations that bear remarkable resemblance to the teachings of Jesus from the Gospels. Even so, the letter makes passing reference to the “glorious Lord Jesus Christ” (2:1; cf. 1:1).
Central to 1 Peter is the glory and salvation that will be manifested at the revelation of Jesus Christ at his second coming (1:5, 7, 9, 13; 4:13; 5:1). Much attention is given to Jesus’ sacrificial death as a lamb (1:19), the example of his suffering (2:21–23; 4:1–2, 13), and the substitutionary nature of his death (2:24; 3:18). He is the Shepherd and Overseer of the souls of Christians (2:25). Peter writes this to encourage congregations in Asia Minor living under adverse conditions, and he sets before them the pattern of Jesus as a model for their own journey.
In 2 Peter we find a mix of Jewish eschatological concepts and Hellenistic religious language, with the author seeking to defend the apostolic gospel in a pagan culture. Jesus is the source of knowledge (1:2, 8; 2:20) and righteousness (1:1). Much emphasis is given to the coming kingdom of Jesus Christ (1:11, 16; 3:10). Jesus is the sustainer and renewer of the church and also the coming judge of the entire world.
Similar themes can be found in Jude, which is addressed to a group of believers who have been infiltrated by false teachers promoting licentiousness. Jude declares the infiltrators to be condemned and calls on the believers to hold fast to the faith. Jesus is the “Sovereign and Lord” (v. 4), Jesus saved people out of Egypt during the exodus (v. 5 [but see marginal notes on the variant reading “Lord”]), the second coming of Jesus will mark the revelation of his “mercy” (v. 21), and the benediction ascribes “glory, majesty, power and authority” to God through Jesus (v. 25). Most characteristic of all is the emphasis upon Jesus/God as the one who keeps the believers in the grip of his saving power (vv. 1, 21, 23).
The Letters of John take up where the Gospel of John left off, focusing on Jesus as the incarnate Word of God. The first of the three Johannine Epistles appears to have been written in a context where a community of Christians was being pressured by Jews to deny that Jesus is the Messiah (2:22) and also by dissident docetists to deny that Jesus had a physical body (4:2; 5:6). The major focus, however, is on Jesus as the Son of God (1:3, 7; 2:23; 3:8, 23; 4:9–10, 15; 5:11) and the incarnation of God’s very own truth and love (3:16; cf. 2 John 3).
Revelation. The Christology of the book of Revelation is best summed up in the opening description of Jesus as “him who is, and who was, and who is to come,” which underscores the lordship of Jesus over the past, present, and future. John then describes Jesus with the threefold titles “the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth” (1:4–5). In many ways, the story and Christology of Revelation are paradoxical. Jesus is both the victim of Roman violence and the victor over human evil. Jesus is the suffering “Lamb of God” and the powerful “Lion of the tribe of Judah.” In Rev. 4–5 we are given a picture of the worship in heaven and the enthronement of Jesus, and yet the realities on earth are a dearth of heavenly goodness, with persecution and apostasy rampant (Rev. 1–3). This tension continues until the final revelation of Jesus, when the heavenly Lord returns to bring the goodness and power of heaven to transform the perils of the earth and bring his people into the new Jerusalem.
Summary
The primary fixtures of a biblical Christology are (1) Jesus Christ is the promised deliverer intimated in Israel’s Scriptures, whose identity and mission are anticipated and illuminated by the law and the prophets; (2) the man Jesus of Nazareth is identified with the risen and exalted Lord Jesus Christ; and (3) Jesus participates in the very identity and being of God. See also Jesus Christ.
The Greek term for “disciple,” mathētēs,means “student.” Like other rabbis and religious figuresof the time, Jesus taught a group of such students (Matt. 9:14;22:16; Mark 2:16; John 1:35; 4:1). The forms of address that Jesus’disciples used for him reflect the nature of the relationship:“rabbi” (Mark 9:5), “teacher” (Mark 9:38),and “master” (Luke 5:5). In addition to receivinginstruction from Jesus, his disciples took care of his physical needs(Matt. 21:1; John 4:8), ate with him (Matt. 9:10; 26:18), performedexorcisms and healings (Matt. 10:1; Luke 10:17), baptized (John 4:2),controlled access to Jesus (Matt. 19:13; John 12:21), and traveledwith him (Luke 8:1; John 2:12). On one occasion Jesus visited thehouse of Peter and healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt. 8:14),which suggests that although the Gospels do not generally depict theprivate lives of Jesus or his disciples apart from their publicministry, the relationship among these men did not prevent thedisciples from maintaining their own homes, families, and, probably,occupations.
Inthe Gospels Jesus is depicted with variously sized groups ofdisciples and followers. A prominent tradition in the Gospelsindicates that there was an inner group of twelve (Matt. 10:1; 26:20;Mark 3:14; 4:10; 6:7; John 6:70), each of whom is known by name. Thisis the group most traditionally understood as “the disciples”of Jesus. As an authority, the group of twelve persisted beyond theascension of Jesus (Acts 6:2). Following the death of Judas Iscariot,Matthias was chosen to take his place among the Twelve (Acts 1:26).Other passages specify a group of seventy or seventy-two (Luke 10:1,16), and often the number of disciples is indeterminate. Severalpassages name disciples beyond the Twelve (Matt. 27:57; Luke 24:18;Acts 9:10; 9:36; 16:1; 21:16), and some later authors attempted tolist the names of the seventy by drawing names from the book of Acts,the Epistles, and other early Christian traditions (e.g., thethirteenth-century Syriac compilation The Book of the Bee). The bookof Acts often refers to any follower of Christ as “disciple,”including those in cities throughout the Roman Empire.
TheGospels tend to present Jesus as a charismatic teacher who couldattract adherents with little overt persuasion. The calling ofseveral disciples is narrated, including that of the brothers SimonPeter and Andrew, the brothers James and John the sons of Zebedee(Mark 1:16–20; John 1:40–41), Philip and Nathanael (John1:44–45), and Matthew/Levi (Mark 2:13–17 pars.). TheGospel of John presents Andrew as a former disciple of John theBaptist.
TheTwelve
Eachof the Synoptic Gospels has a list of the Twelve (Matt. 10:1–4;Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16; cf. the list of eleven inActs 1:13), and the Gospel of John mentions “the Twelve”several times without providing a list. With some slightharmonizations, it is possible to come up with a single list oftwelve disciples based on the three Synoptic lists.
(1)Allthree Synoptic Gospels agree in placing Simon Peter first in thelist. (2)His brother Andrew is second, though Mark has placedAndrew farther down the list and does not identify him as Peter’sbrother. (3)James the son of Zebedee and (4)John thebrother of James are next. Mark adds that the two were also named“Boanerges,” meaning “sons of thunder.” Theplacement of Peter, James, and John at the head of the listcorresponds with the prominence of these three disciples in the storyof Jesus’ arrest at Gethsemane, where these three were present(Matt. 26:37// Mark 14:33). Perhaps the order of Mark’slist reflects the prestige of these three disciples, with Matthew andLuke bringing Andrew to the head of the list not because of anyparticular importance but so that he is listed with his brotherPeter.
Thelists continue with (5)Philip, (6)Bartholomew, and(7)Matthew, further identified in Matt. 10:3 as a “taxcollector.” The calling of Matthew is narrated in Matt. 9:9–13and also in Mark 2:13–17; Luke 5:27–32, where Matthew iscalled “Levi.” (8)Thomas is next (Matt. 10:3 listsThomas before Matthew; in John 20:24 he is also called “Didymus”),followed by (9)James the son of Alphaeus (Mark 2:14 also callsLevi “son of Alphaeus”), so named to avoid confusion withJames the son of Zebedee. (10)Simon the Cananaean (Matt. 10:4;Mark 3:18 NRSV) or Zealot (Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13) is so designated toavoid confusion with Simon Peter. The precise meaning of the term“Cananaean” is uncertain (see Cananaean). (11)Thaddaeus(who precedes Simon the Cananaean in Matthew and Mark) probablyshould be identified with the eleventh disciple in Luke’s list,Judas the son of James. The names of Thaddaeus and Judas son of Jamesrepresent the greatest single discrepancy among the three lists, butit may be mitigated somewhat by the fact that some manuscriptsidentify “Thaddaeus” as a surname (though they give thisdisciple’s other name as “Lebbaeus,” not “Judas”).All three lists agree in listing (12)Judas Iscariot as the lastdisciple in the list, and all note that he betrayed Jesus or became atraitor. The fact that Judas Iscariot bears a second name(“Iscariot”) may suggest that there was another Judasamong the Twelve from whom it was necessary to distinguish him, as inthe case of the two Simons and the two Jameses. This observationlends some weight to the notion that Thaddaeus was also named“Judas.”
TheDisciples as Apostles
Atvarious points in his ministry Jesus sent out his disciples to preachand perform miracles, hence they are also referred to as “apostles”(i.e., emissaries). The connection between these two terms is madeclear in Luke 6:13: “When morning came, he called his disciplesto him and chose twelve of them, whom he also designated apostles.”In the NT Epistles the title “apostle” is applied toseveral individuals who were not among Jesus’ twelve disciples,most notably Paul. In sum, both “disciple” and “apostle”have narrow and broad meanings in the NT, though there is substantialcontinuity between “the Twelve” disciples or apostles ofJesus and the narrow definition of “apostle” in the earlychapters of Acts.
TheLater Careers of the Disciples
Afterhis resurrection, Jesus told his disciples (“the apostles hehad chosen” [Acts 1:2]) that they would be his witnesses “inJerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of theearth” (Acts 1:8). Stories about the subsequent careers of theTwelve exist in both the NT and other early Christian sources. Thefirst half of Acts largely focuses on the career of Simon Peter,before attention shifts to the career of Paul in the eastern RomanEmpire. Extracanonical books and local legends trace the latercareers of Jesus’ twelve disciples, placing them in Rome(Peter), Scythia (Andrew), Spain (James), Ephesus (John), Phrygia(Philip), Armenia (Bartholomew and Thaddaeus), India (Thomas),Ethiopia (Matthew), and North Africa (Simon the Cananaean). Piouslocal traditions attribute martyrdom to a number of the Twelve,though in the NT we know only of the deaths of Judas Iscariot (Matt.27:3–10; Acts 1:16–20) and James the son of Zebedee (Acts12:1–2).
A village approximately seven miles (sixty stadia in the Greek text) from Jerusalem. The village is of particular note because of Luke’s account of two disciples walking to Emmaus from Jerusalem and their encounter with the risen Christ (Luke 24:13–32). It is located at the eastern end of the Ayalon Valley.
The organ of visual perception. The eye is the lamp of the body, so that someone who has a sound or healthy eye can experience light, but someone with a deficient eye experiences only darkness (Matt. 6:22–23). Bright eyes signify alertness and good health (1Sam. 14:27–29; Ps. 38:10), whereas dim eyes signify poor vision, often from old age (Gen. 27:1; 48:10; 1Sam. 3:2). Blindness may be cured by opening the eyes (Isa. 35:5; John 9:14), although Paul was blind even with his eyes open (Acts 9:8). To lift or raise the eyes is to take a look around or look toward something (Gen. 13:10; 18:2; John 11:41). To turn the eyes from something is to no longer look at it (Ps. 119:37; Song 6:5; Isa. 22:4). Something hidden from the eyes is unknown (Num. 5:13; Job 28:21; Luke 19:42), but hiding the eyes from something is to ignore it (Isa. 1:15; Ezek. 22:26; cf. Lev. 20:4). The expression “before the eyes” signifies that an event has taken place in the presence of others, and they have witnessedit.
The eye is an important part of the body (1Cor. 12:16–21). A defective eye disqualified a priest from certain duties (Lev. 21:17–20). A conquering army often gouged out the eyes of the defeated enemy (Judg. 16:21; 2Kings 25:7), rendering them ineffective in battle (1Sam. 11:2). Destroying Israel’s eyes is the first among many punishments listed for breaking God’s covenant (Lev. 26:16). Paul testifies that the Galatians cared enough for him even to pluck out their eyes in order to give them to him (Gal. 4:15). The importance of the eye highlights the importance of Jesus’ demand to pluck it out if it causes one to stumble (Matt. 5:29; 18:9).
Perception and enlightenment. Opening eyes is a theme that runs through both Testaments. At times, opening the eyes simply refers to making one aware of previously unknown information. It may be in this sense that the eyes of Adam and Eve are opened, since they become aware of their nakedness (Gen. 3:7). This same kind of opening occurs when God reveals a well to Hagar (Gen. 21:19), when Balaam sees the angel of the Lord standing in his way (Num. 22:31), and when the disciples on the road to Emmaus recognize Jesus (Luke 24:31). This sense is extended into the spiritual realm, so that the eye is used figuratively as the principal organ of spiritual perception. To open or enlighten the eyes in this sense involves one of the following: (1)allowing one to understand spiritual truth in the law of God (Ps. 119:18), prophetic utterance (Num. 24:3), or by the Spirit of God (Eph. 1:18); or (2)leading someone to repentance and conversion (Acts 26:18). These spiritual eyes may also be blinded or closed, hindering the person from repenting (Isa. 6:10; Matt. 13:13; cf. 2Cor. 4:4).
The eye not only allows one to perceive the world but also helps others perceive the person. David has beautiful eyes, highlighting his handsome appearance (1Sam. 16:12). Leah has weak eyes, a characteristic that is contrasted to the beautiful appearance of her sister, Rachel (Gen. 29:17). A bountiful eye reveals a generous spirit (Prov. 22:9). Haughty eyes reveal arrogance (Ps. 18:27; Prov. 6:17), as do eyes that are exalted (Ps. 131:1; Prov. 30:13). Eyes may reveal one’s pity for another (Ezek. 16:5), but in the administration of justice, the eye is not allowed to pity or spare, meaning that the law will be executed to its fullest extent (Deut. 7:16; Ezek. 5:11). The eye that mocks a father or a mother reveals a person who holds them in contempt (Prov. 30:17).
Direction and evaluation. The eye also serves as a symbol for direction, care, and vast knowledge. Since the eye allows one to see, it helps set the proper course forward, physically (Num. 10:31) or spiritually (1John 2:11). The fact that God’s eyes are always upon the land of Israel demonstrates his care for it (Deut. 11:12). Likewise, his eyes are always upon the righteous, ready to help them (Ps. 34:15). Especially in apocalyptic literature, the many eyes of the living creatures are symbols of God’s omniscience (Ezek. 1:18; Rev. 4:6), while the eyes of God in general are symbols of his awareness (1Kings 9:3; Jer. 32:19; Amos 9:8; Heb. 4:13).
Finally, the eyes are associated with evaluation. The eyes of God often represent his favor or disfavor (Gen. 6:8; Deut. 21:9; 2Kings 10:30). Those who evaluate themselves in their own eyes are often led astray because the eyes can lead to sinful lust (Num. 15:39; Deut. 12:8; Judg. 17:6; Prov. 3:7; 1John 2:16).
Generally speaking, in Scripture the word “fool” is used to describe someone in a morally deprived state. It does not, as in contemporary American usage, refer to a person’s lack of intellectual ability or to one whose actions convey those of a buffoon. Terms for “fool” appear all through Scripture, but wisdom literature contains the highest concentration. Proverbs uses over half a dozen words to describe the fool. All of them indicate some kind of moral breach and fall on a scale from the most morally hardened to the naive.
Obstinacy, recalcitrance, and closed-mindedness characterize the morally dense fool. Such individuals have no use for advice from others because they are “wise in their own eyes” (Prov. 3:7; cf. 12:15; 16:2). Fools frequently scoff at correction and rebuke (9:7–8, 12; 13:1; 14:6; 15:12; 19:25; 20:1; 21:11, 24; 22:10; 24:9). They manifest arrogance (21:24). Fools do not learn from their own mistakes or those of others but instead often repeat them (26:11). One of the main problems is that fools “lack sense,” which ultimately implies that they lack character (see 6:32; 7:7; 9:4, 16; 10:13, 21; 11:12; 12:11; 15:21; 17:18; 24:30). Such a person consistently makes poor decisions and loses the appetite and passion necessary for acquiring wisdom.
According to the book of Proverbs, three qualities make up the essential nature of the fool. First, the fool is unwilling to learn by means of discipline (3:11–12; 17:10), or formal instruction (17:16), or a word of advice (12:15), or personal experience (26:11). Second, the fool lacks self-control. Both the speech (15:2) and the behavior (14:16) of fools demonstrate a lack of restraint. They take the path of least resistance to easy money (1:8–19) and easy sex (7:6–27). Third, the fool is the one who rejects the fear of the Lord (1:7).
All half a dozen terms used for “fool” indicate, to one degree or another, a moral breach. The one exception is peti, the word used to indicate the “simple” (e.g., Prov. 1:4; 19:25; 21:11). This word is at the other end of the moral spectrum from “fool” and refers to one who is young, vulnerable, and inexperienced. The simple are the gullible, impressionable persons. These individuals can be influenced for either good or ill, depending on whom they listen to. Both Woman Wisdom and Woman Folly make compelling calls to the simple (Prov. 9:6, 16). This simple youth will make moral mistakes along the way, but the peti has yet to harden into a full-fledged fool, one who is incorrigible and unteachable.
In the NT, the fool is the one who does not trust in God or in the power that God displays through the resurrection of Christ (Luke 24:25; Rom. 1:22; 1Cor. 15:36). Jesus makes references to the fool when he tells the stories of the wise and foolish builders (Matt. 7:24–27) and the wise and foolish maidens (Matt. 25:1–13). Paul uses the term “foolish” to rebuke the Galatians for their refusal to accept the gospel (Gal. 3:1). However, in his correspondence with the church in Corinth, Paul reverses the conventional understanding of folly and uses it as a rhetorical strategy to communicate his message. He speaks of the message of the cross as foolishness to the world (1Cor. 1:18). On another occasion, in order to argue against the arrogance of his opponents, Paul engages in “a little foolishness” (2Cor. 11:1) as he boasts about his ministry, which is riddled with failure (2Cor. 11–12).
Generally speaking, in Scripture the word “fool” is used to describe someone in a morally deprived state. It does not, as in contemporary American usage, refer to a person’s lack of intellectual ability or to one whose actions convey those of a buffoon. Terms for “fool” appear all through Scripture, but wisdom literature contains the highest concentration. Proverbs uses over half a dozen words to describe the fool. All of them indicate some kind of moral breach and fall on a scale from the most morally hardened to the naive.
Obstinacy, recalcitrance, and closed-mindedness characterize the morally dense fool. Such individuals have no use for advice from others because they are “wise in their own eyes” (Prov. 3:7; cf. 12:15; 16:2). Fools frequently scoff at correction and rebuke (9:7–8, 12; 13:1; 14:6; 15:12; 19:25; 20:1; 21:11, 24; 22:10; 24:9). They manifest arrogance (21:24). Fools do not learn from their own mistakes or those of others but instead often repeat them (26:11). One of the main problems is that fools “lack sense,” which ultimately implies that they lack character (see 6:32; 7:7; 9:4, 16; 10:13, 21; 11:12; 12:11; 15:21; 17:18; 24:30). Such a person consistently makes poor decisions and loses the appetite and passion necessary for acquiring wisdom.
According to the book of Proverbs, three qualities make up the essential nature of the fool. First, the fool is unwilling to learn by means of discipline (3:11–12; 17:10), or formal instruction (17:16), or a word of advice (12:15), or personal experience (26:11). Second, the fool lacks self-control. Both the speech (15:2) and the behavior (14:16) of fools demonstrate a lack of restraint. They take the path of least resistance to easy money (1:8–19) and easy sex (7:6–27). Third, the fool is the one who rejects the fear of the Lord (1:7).
All half a dozen terms used for “fool” indicate, to one degree or another, a moral breach. The one exception is peti, the word used to indicate the “simple” (e.g., Prov. 1:4; 19:25; 21:11). This word is at the other end of the moral spectrum from “fool” and refers to one who is young, vulnerable, and inexperienced. The simple are the gullible, impressionable persons. These individuals can be influenced for either good or ill, depending on whom they listen to. Both Woman Wisdom and Woman Folly make compelling calls to the simple (Prov. 9:6, 16). This simple youth will make moral mistakes along the way, but the peti has yet to harden into a full-fledged fool, one who is incorrigible and unteachable.
In the NT, the fool is the one who does not trust in God or in the power that God displays through the resurrection of Christ (Luke 24:25; Rom. 1:22; 1Cor. 15:36). Jesus makes references to the fool when he tells the stories of the wise and foolish builders (Matt. 7:24–27) and the wise and foolish maidens (Matt. 25:1–13). Paul uses the term “foolish” to rebuke the Galatians for their refusal to accept the gospel (Gal. 3:1). However, in his correspondence with the church in Corinth, Paul reverses the conventional understanding of folly and uses it as a rhetorical strategy to communicate his message. He speaks of the message of the cross as foolishness to the world (1Cor. 1:18). On another occasion, in order to argue against the arrogance of his opponents, Paul engages in “a little foolishness” (2Cor. 11:1) as he boasts about his ministry, which is riddled with failure (2Cor. 11–12).
Physiologically, the heart is an organ in the body, and inthe Bible it is also used in a number of metaphors. The NT uses theGreek term kardia similarly to the OT Hebrew terms leb and lebab andin some cases depends on OT usage.
Mindand Emotions
Metaphorically,the heart refers to the mind, the will, the seat of emotions, or eventhe whole person. It also refers to the center of something or itsinner part. These metaphors come from the heart’s importanceand location.
Mind.The heart refers to the mind, but not the brain, and in these casesdoes not involve human physiology. It is a metaphor, and while theneurophysiology of the heart may be interesting in its own right, ithas no bearing on this use of language. We also should not confusesome modern English idioms or distinctions as being related to thebiblical viewpoint. The Bible does not make a distinction between“head knowledge” and “heart knowledge,” nordoes it employ language making the “heart” good orsuperior and the “head/mind” bad, inferior, or merelyintellectual. It does not prize the emotional over the thoughtful; ithas a more integrated viewpoint.
Deuteronomy6:5 issues the command to love God with all one’s heart, soul,and strength. When the command is repeated in the Gospels, it occursin three variations (Matt. 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27). Common toall three is the addition of the word “mind.” The Gospelwriters want to be sure that the audience hears Jesus adding “mind,”but this addition is based on the fact that the meaning of the Hebrewword for “heart” includes the mind.
Themental activities of the metaphorical heart are abundant. The heartis where a person thinks (Gen. 6:5; Deut. 7:17; 1Chron. 29:18;Rev. 18:7), where a person comprehends and has understanding (1Kings3:9; Job 17:4; Ps. 49:3; Prov. 14:13; Matt. 13:15). The heart makesplans and has intentions (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Prov. 20:5; 1Chron.29:18; Jer. 23:20). One believes with the heart (Luke 24:25; Acts8:37; Rom. 10:9). The heart is the site of wisdom, discernment, andskill (Exod. 35:34; 36:2; 1Kings 3:9; 10:24). The heart is theplace of memory (Deut. 4:9; Ps. 119:11). The heart plays the role ofconscience (2Sam. 24:10; 1John 3:20–21).
Itis often worth the effort to substitute “mind” for“heart” when reading the Bible in order to grasp themental dimension. For example, after telling the Israelites to loveGod with all their heart, Moses says, “These commandments thatI give you today are to be upon your hearts” (Deut. 6:6).Reading it instead as “be on your mind” changes ourperspective, and in this case the idiom “on your mind” isclearer and more accurate. The following verses instruct parents totalk to their children throughout the day about God’s words. Inorder for parents to do this, God’s requirements and deeds needto be constantly on their minds, out of their love for him.Similarly, love for God and loyalty are expressed by meditation onand determination to obey his law (Ps. 119:11, 112). The law is notmerely a list of rules; it is also a repository of a worldview inwhich the Lord is the only God. To live consistently with this truthrequires careful, reflective thought.
Emotionsand attitude.The heart, as the seat of emotion, is associated with a number offeelings and sentiments, such as gladness (Exod. 4:14; Acts 2:26),hatred (Lev. 19:17), pride (Deut. 8:14), resentment (Deut. 15:10),dread (Deut. 28:67), sympathy (Judg. 5:9), love (Judg. 16:15),sadness (1Sam. 1:8; John 16:6), and jealousy and ambition(James 3:14). The heart is also the frame of reference for attitudessuch as willingness, courage, and desire.
Idioms
Theword “heart” also appears in several idioms.
Hardnessof heart.A hard heart is obstinate or averse (Mark 3:5), while a tender heartis humble (2Kings 22:19). In the book of Exodus thetranslations typically say that God or Pharaoh hardened Pharaoh’s/hisheart. These passages in Exodus use not the Hebrew words for hardnessbut rather those for being heavy or for strengthening. The neutralsense of strengthening the heart takes on nuances in context forbeing bold or obstinate. Pharaoh was strengthened in his oppositionto God, and this obstinacy fits the idiom of having a hard heart.
Uncircumcised/circumcisedheart.An uncircumcised heart is a metaphor for an obstinate and rebelliousheart, while a circumcised heart is linked to being humble andfaithful (Lev. 26:41; Deut. 30:6; Jer. 4:4; Acts 7:51). Perhaps themetaphor is based on the role of circumcision in the covenant.
“Aman after his [God’s] own heart” (1Sam. 13:14).This description of David may mean either “according to his[God’s] choice” (cf. 2Sam. 7:21), stressing God’schoice over the people’s choice, or it may mean “inaccordance with his [God’s] desire” (1Sam. 14:7;1Kings 15:3), referring to how David showed conformity withGod’s agenda.
Allthe heart.The phrase “with all [one’s] heart” in some casesmeans “wholeheartedly” or “single-mindedly,”which emphasizes unity of purpose and focus. In other cases it seemsto mean, more broadly, “with all of one’s thinking orperspective” and implies the work of adjusting our worldviewaway from common cultural assumptions and toward God’steaching.
Sayin one’s heart.This expression denotes talking to oneself (i.e., thinking) ratherthan out loud or indicates reflection or deliberation. There areseveral warnings not to lie to oneself—that is, not todeliberate, believe, and act on the stated false premise.
Take[a matter] to heart.To take something to heart is to take it very seriously or to give ithigh priority.
Hermeneutics is the science and practice of interpretation. It can refer more generally to the philosophy of human understanding, or more specifically to the tools and methods used for interpreting communicative acts.
Human communication takes place in a variety of ways: through the use of nonverbal signs, through speech, and through writing. Effective communication requires some degree of shared belief, knowledge, and background between the participants. If the communicators have a significant amount of common ground, they will be able to successfully understand one another with little extra effort. Conversely, individuals with vastly different backgrounds will need to take extra steps to communicate effectively, such as defining special terms, avoiding jargon and colloquialisms, appreciating details about the other’s cultural assumptions, or learning a foreign language.
The Bible is not exempt from this process of communication. The Scriptures are meant to be read, understood, and put into practice (Luke 8:4–15; James 1:18), a task that requires effort and study on the part of its readers (Acts 17:11; 2 Tim. 2:15). Everyone who reads the Bible is involved in this interpretative process, though readers will vary in their hermeneutical self-consciousness and skill. Thus, although readers are able to understand and appropriate much of the Bible without any special training in hermeneutical principles, such training is appropriate and helpful, both in attaining self-consciousness in interpretation and in acquiring new skills and insights in the effort to become a better reader.
The Development of Hermeneutics
The church has benefited from a long history of thinking about the nature and purpose of interpreting its Scriptures, and that reflection has resulted in a wide variety of hermeneutical theories and practices. How does one determine the meaning of a text? Is meaning the truth embedded within the passage? Or is it the original author’s intention in writing? Or does the text act independently of its author and history, either because it stands on its own terms or because it only “means” anything in interaction with readers? The answers to these questions will determine how readers approach a text, the questions they expect that text to answer, and the tools they use in interpretation.
From the early church to the Enlightenment. The early church emphasized the ability of the biblical text to convey heavenly truth, whether that truth was conceived as doctrinal teaching or absolute ethical rules. While the “literal meaning” of many texts could often supply simple truths and maxims, such a reading was at other times inadequate and could appear incompatible with what were considered basic and fundamental beliefs. Various allegorical techniques were therefore employed to explain such problematic texts. Interpreters often viewed the literal and historical features of the text as a starting point in the search for fuller meaning, as symbolic pointers to moral principles, absolute truths, or eternal realities. These practices were systematized throughout the Middle Ages and resulted in an extensive development of tradition. Church tradition, in turn, provided a degree of protection from the potential for arbitrariness in allegorical techniques, insisting that interpretation must be guided by the “rule of faith,” the traditional teaching and faith of the church.
Beginning in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, scholarship moved to distance itself from such tradition. The Protestant Reformers, dissatisfied with the rule of church tradition, sought to displace its authority with the direct rule of Scripture. They therefore returned to the original biblical text, engaging in critical study of the text itself and translating the Bible into the vernacular to make it more widely accessible. In the centuries that followed, Enlightenment scholars went a step further in their rejection of the church as the sole repository of knowledge. Instead, they asserted, knowledge was acquired through scientific inquiry and critical study. Such inquiry could be applied to any field: the forces of nature, human anatomy, or the interpretation of texts. The meaning of a text was not some abstract truth or heavenly principle; rather, meaning was determined by the human author’s original intention in writing and was therefore a historical matter. The intention of an author could be better exposed and understood through a more complete study of both the language in which a text was written and the historical circumstances that surrounded it. Many of these same emphases had been championed by the Protestant Reformers; yet the Enlightenment thinkers differed on one key point: the Reformers never questioned that the text was the word of God.
From the Enlightenment to the present. This favorable attitude toward historical research dwindled over the centuries. In its place authors emphasized the primacy of the text as text, apart from any connection to its origin and history. Literature, it is argued, ultimately operates independently from its author’s intention. All that matters is the text, and it is the reader’s job to understand the text on its own terms, apart from the contingencies surrounding its creation. To that end, interpreters should pay careful attention to the text’s literary features, including its plot structure, characterization, themes, and use of imagery. An interesting example of this hermeneutical dynamic is found in John 19:22, where Pilate asserts, “What I have written, I have written.” Pilate’s words quickly take on significance far beyond their author’s intention, primarily because they are juxtaposed with other themes in John, such as testimony and the kingship of Christ.
More recent approaches have emphasized the role of the reader in the construction of meaning. Interpretation, it is argued, is determined by the interaction between reader and text; readers bring their own presuppositions to the task of interpretation, and such assumptions determine meaning. The author and the historical context of the text will exert some influence, but the primary determinant of meaning is the present reader in his or her present environment. This is not to say that the text “means” whatever a reader wants it to mean; rather, it makes meaning contingent upon the contemporary environment and not subject to anything external to individual readers. On the one hand, readers must“actualize” the text by applying and appropriating it within an environment alien to the original. On the other, readers have the right, and in some cases the responsibility, of undermining the text, particularly if that text assists in the oppression of others.
Elements of an Effective Hermeneutic
An effective hermeneutic requires keeping each of these elements in constant balance with one another. God’s word is truthful and fully trustworthy, yet it is given to his people through individual human authors, authors who wrote in a particular context to a particular audience at a particular time. Understanding the Bible therefore requires knowledge of the purposes of these authors in their specific historical contexts. Nevertheless, our primary access to authorial intention is through the biblical text itself. Finally, understanding always requires personal interaction with, and application of, the text of Scripture to each person’s own life and circumstances. Thus, hermeneutics involves the simultaneous interaction of a variety of perspectives—truth, author, text, and reader—each of which cannot function properly without the others. What follows here is an outline of the most important hermeneutical tools required for such a weighty endeavor.
Linguistics
An appreciation of the nature, structure, and function of language is fundamental to any interpretative endeavor. Obviously, this applies first of all to the specific languages in which the books of the Bible were originally composed. Each language has its own unique vocabulary, grammar, and syntax, and structures available to a writer in one language often are absent in another. Thus, while it is often necessary and acceptable to rely on translations (Neh. 7:73–8:12), readers should be aware that translation itself involves a degree of unavoidable interpretation.
A more general analysis of language is also useful. Understanding the typical patterns by which authors will string sentences together is necessary for following a writing’s train of thought. This tool, called “discourse analysis,” operates above the sentence level, attempting to understand and explain how sentences function in conjunction with one another in order to produce meaningful paragraphs, and how those paragraphs in turn operate within the overarching purpose of the discourse. These patterns of discourse can vary on the basis of book, author, language, culture, and literary genre, but there are also features of effective discourse common to all communication. Thus, while the principles and rules of communication are often intuitively grasped, understanding language, both generally and specifically, is foundational to the task of interpretation.
Literature and Literary Theory
The biblical writers are concerned not only with the informational content of their writing, but also with the manner in which that content is communicated. The words, patterns of speech, style, and imagery of any text provide significant insight into its purpose and message, apart from that text’s specific propositional content. The diversity of language used in the Gospels provides an example of this. Each of the four Gospel authors has a slightly different concern in his writing. John’s purpose, “that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31), explains his frequent use of courtroom language, such as “testimony” and “witness” (e.g., John 21:24). Mark, by contrast, sweeps the reader along a fast-paced and intensely personal exposition of Jesus’ life and death through the terseness and immediacy of his narration. Attention to these literary details allows the reader to more fully participate in the world of the text.
Such decisions will often depend upon a thorough analysis of genre. A reader naturally interprets historical narrative differently from poetry and didactic material. Furthermore, the conventions of different genres change over time. The book of Acts, for example, despite its essentially historical character, does not appear concerned with recording an exact dictation of the many speeches it reports, despite modern expectations that historical writing should be as precise as possible. The classification of ancient genres and the description of their respective conventions therefore require a good deal of analysis and sensitivity, but often such insights are provided by a careful and open reading of the text.
History
As the product of a particular author at a particular time, each book of the Bible is situated within its own unique historical context. Paul, for example, while perhaps conscious of the importance of his letters for posterity, wrote to specific churches or individuals with a singular purpose. This particularity of author, audience, and circumstance can often cause interpretative problems. Thus, while background studies are not always necessary to get the general idea of the author’s message, they can be invaluable in protecting readers from anachronism and enabling them to better appreciate the author’s purpose and perspective.
Historical study is assisted by specialized disciplines. Archaeology, for example, focuses on the beliefs, habits, practices, and history of ancient cultures, harnessing a wealth of evidence to that end. Similarly, anthropology and other social sciences are able to explore facets of modern cultures in order to better assess cross-cultural presuppositions and behaviors, many of which provide insight into ancient civilizations that shared similar attitudes. These methods provide the reader with the information necessary to understand a text in terms consistent with its cultural backdrop, highlighting both the similarities and the differences between the Bible and its environment. Recent discoveries of ancient Hittite treaties, for example, shed light on the “cutting ceremony” recorded in Gen. 15. These treaties detail similar ceremonies in which the vassal of a king would walk between hewed animal carcasses as a symbol of allegiance; if disobedience occurred, the vassal would share the fate of the animals. A similar ceremony occurs in Genesis, but with an interesting twist at the end: God, not Abram, passes through the pieces (15:17).
Humility and the Attitude of the Reader
Careful attention in interpretation requires a great deal of humility. It is difficult to overstate the importance of the attitude of the reader for an effective hermeneutic. Being a good reader requires willingness to share and participate in the world of the author and the text, a willingness that postpones judgment and expects personal change. This, in turn, requires a spirit of self-criticism, a commitment to defer one’s own presuppositions in favor of those of the text. Although readers are never able to fully distance themselves from their cultural situation and assumptions, the study of hermeneutics, among other things, can provide tools and skills for self-criticism and self-awareness, skills that enable the reader to better understand, appreciate, and appropriate the meaning of a text. Even a peripheral understanding of the complexities of interpretation can help readers develop an attitude of humility, imagination, and expectation as they approach the Scriptures.
Such humility is a prerequisite for application. The depth of meaning embedded in any text, and especially within the Bible, provides the humble reader with a rich and powerful tool for personal growth. Having better understood the world of the text on its own terms, readers are able to “project” that world onto themselves and their environment, to appropriate its meaning in a new and possibly foreign context. Thus, Jesus promises that those who hear, understand, and put his word into practice will yield a crop “some thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times what was sown” (Mark 4:20).
Unique Features of Biblical Interpretation
Certain unique features of the biblical text can create special opportunities and challenges for the Christian interpreter. These challenges are at work in the Bible’s own interpretation of itself. The Bible was written by many different authors over the course of a long period of history; it is therefore not surprising to find later authors reflecting on earlier periods. This innerbiblical interpretation offers the Christian insights into the unique nature of biblical hermeneutics and therefore provides a foundational model in approaching the Bible as the word of God.
The common and preeminent assumption that grounds innerbiblical interpretation is the commitment to ultimate divine authorship. Thus, the writer of Hebrews, though affirming the diversity of human authorship in the Bible (1:1), regularly introduces OT quotations with statements such as “God says” (1:5), “he spoke through David” (4:7), and “the Holy Spirit says” (3:7). Other writers tend to prefer the formula “it is written,” but each of these reflects a common presupposition that the Scriptures are ultimately delivered by God (2 Pet. 1:21).
Divine authorship means, at the very least, that there is a depth of meaning and purpose to the text, a depth often hidden even from the human author (1 Pet. 1:10–12). Psalm 2, for example, probably originally served as a coronation hymn used to celebrate the appointment of a new king in Israel. Yet the NT understands this psalm as a prophecy fulfilled in the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:33; Heb. 5:5). The intention of the original speaker can even be at odds with God’s intention, such as when Caiaphas claims, “It is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish” (John 11:50; cf. Acts 5:35–39). In this case, the irony of Caiaphas’s statement creates a powerful testimony, contrary to his intent, and is used by John to promote confidence in Jesus.
Furthermore, because the Scriptures are from God, they have a consistent and central focus. The NT unhesitatingly views all of Scripture, in all its diversity, as focused, by virtue of divine inspiration, on the person and work of Jesus Christ. This is seen in, for example, Luke 24:13–35, where the resurrected Jesus, “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” explains to his disciples “what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself” (cf. John 5:39; 12:41). This central focus on Christ requires the Christian interpreter to understand any individual verse in light of its context within the canon, to operate with the same assumption as the NT apostles, that all the Scriptures are concerned with testifying to Jesus the Christ.
Additionally, Paul views both Testaments as the special possession and once-for-all foundation of God’s church (Eph. 2:19–20; cf. Acts 2:42). The church, from a NT perspective, is the primary audience of the entirety of Scripture (1 Pet. 1:12) and is therefore uniquely entrusted with understanding and proclaiming its message (Matt. 28:18–20). While the Scriptures themselves are the only infallible guide for interpretation, believers should not forsake the teaching and tradition of the church (2 Thess. 2:15).
Finally, full understanding of the Bible requires the work of the Holy Spirit in conjunction with the faith of the reader. Belief and understanding go together (John 10:38), and both are the result of the unique work of the Holy Spirit (16:13). The proof that such understanding has taken place is the godly life of the believer (Rom. 2:13; James 1:22–25). The reverse is also true: disobedience works against understanding the riches of God’s Word (James 1:21). Such considerations underline the importance of the hermeneutical task. The tools and principles of hermeneutics are valuable only insofar as they enable the reader to better understand and appropriate the biblical message, to hear the word of God and respond appropriately.
Hermeneutics is the science and practice of interpretation. It can refer more generally to the philosophy of human understanding, or more specifically to the tools and methods used for interpreting communicative acts.
Human communication takes place in a variety of ways: through the use of nonverbal signs, through speech, and through writing. Effective communication requires some degree of shared belief, knowledge, and background between the participants. If the communicators have a significant amount of common ground, they will be able to successfully understand one another with little extra effort. Conversely, individuals with vastly different backgrounds will need to take extra steps to communicate effectively, such as defining special terms, avoiding jargon and colloquialisms, appreciating details about the other’s cultural assumptions, or learning a foreign language.
The Bible is not exempt from this process of communication. The Scriptures are meant to be read, understood, and put into practice (Luke 8:4–15; James 1:18), a task that requires effort and study on the part of its readers (Acts 17:11; 2 Tim. 2:15). Everyone who reads the Bible is involved in this interpretative process, though readers will vary in their hermeneutical self-consciousness and skill. Thus, although readers are able to understand and appropriate much of the Bible without any special training in hermeneutical principles, such training is appropriate and helpful, both in attaining self-consciousness in interpretation and in acquiring new skills and insights in the effort to become a better reader.
The Development of Hermeneutics
The church has benefited from a long history of thinking about the nature and purpose of interpreting its Scriptures, and that reflection has resulted in a wide variety of hermeneutical theories and practices. How does one determine the meaning of a text? Is meaning the truth embedded within the passage? Or is it the original author’s intention in writing? Or does the text act independently of its author and history, either because it stands on its own terms or because it only “means” anything in interaction with readers? The answers to these questions will determine how readers approach a text, the questions they expect that text to answer, and the tools they use in interpretation.
From the early church to the Enlightenment. The early church emphasized the ability of the biblical text to convey heavenly truth, whether that truth was conceived as doctrinal teaching or absolute ethical rules. While the “literal meaning” of many texts could often supply simple truths and maxims, such a reading was at other times inadequate and could appear incompatible with what were considered basic and fundamental beliefs. Various allegorical techniques were therefore employed to explain such problematic texts. Interpreters often viewed the literal and historical features of the text as a starting point in the search for fuller meaning, as symbolic pointers to moral principles, absolute truths, or eternal realities. These practices were systematized throughout the Middle Ages and resulted in an extensive development of tradition. Church tradition, in turn, provided a degree of protection from the potential for arbitrariness in allegorical techniques, insisting that interpretation must be guided by the “rule of faith,” the traditional teaching and faith of the church.
Beginning in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, scholarship moved to distance itself from such tradition. The Protestant Reformers, dissatisfied with the rule of church tradition, sought to displace its authority with the direct rule of Scripture. They therefore returned to the original biblical text, engaging in critical study of the text itself and translating the Bible into the vernacular to make it more widely accessible. In the centuries that followed, Enlightenment scholars went a step further in their rejection of the church as the sole repository of knowledge. Instead, they asserted, knowledge was acquired through scientific inquiry and critical study. Such inquiry could be applied to any field: the forces of nature, human anatomy, or the interpretation of texts. The meaning of a text was not some abstract truth or heavenly principle; rather, meaning was determined by the human author’s original intention in writing and was therefore a historical matter. The intention of an author could be better exposed and understood through a more complete study of both the language in which a text was written and the historical circumstances that surrounded it. Many of these same emphases had been championed by the Protestant Reformers; yet the Enlightenment thinkers differed on one key point: the Reformers never questioned that the text was the word of God.
From the Enlightenment to the present. This favorable attitude toward historical research dwindled over the centuries. In its place authors emphasized the primacy of the text as text, apart from any connection to its origin and history. Literature, it is argued, ultimately operates independently from its author’s intention. All that matters is the text, and it is the reader’s job to understand the text on its own terms, apart from the contingencies surrounding its creation. To that end, interpreters should pay careful attention to the text’s literary features, including its plot structure, characterization, themes, and use of imagery. An interesting example of this hermeneutical dynamic is found in John 19:22, where Pilate asserts, “What I have written, I have written.” Pilate’s words quickly take on significance far beyond their author’s intention, primarily because they are juxtaposed with other themes in John, such as testimony and the kingship of Christ.
More recent approaches have emphasized the role of the reader in the construction of meaning. Interpretation, it is argued, is determined by the interaction between reader and text; readers bring their own presuppositions to the task of interpretation, and such assumptions determine meaning. The author and the historical context of the text will exert some influence, but the primary determinant of meaning is the present reader in his or her present environment. This is not to say that the text “means” whatever a reader wants it to mean; rather, it makes meaning contingent upon the contemporary environment and not subject to anything external to individual readers. On the one hand, readers must“actualize” the text by applying and appropriating it within an environment alien to the original. On the other, readers have the right, and in some cases the responsibility, of undermining the text, particularly if that text assists in the oppression of others.
Elements of an Effective Hermeneutic
An effective hermeneutic requires keeping each of these elements in constant balance with one another. God’s word is truthful and fully trustworthy, yet it is given to his people through individual human authors, authors who wrote in a particular context to a particular audience at a particular time. Understanding the Bible therefore requires knowledge of the purposes of these authors in their specific historical contexts. Nevertheless, our primary access to authorial intention is through the biblical text itself. Finally, understanding always requires personal interaction with, and application of, the text of Scripture to each person’s own life and circumstances. Thus, hermeneutics involves the simultaneous interaction of a variety of perspectives—truth, author, text, and reader—each of which cannot function properly without the others. What follows here is an outline of the most important hermeneutical tools required for such a weighty endeavor.
Linguistics
An appreciation of the nature, structure, and function of language is fundamental to any interpretative endeavor. Obviously, this applies first of all to the specific languages in which the books of the Bible were originally composed. Each language has its own unique vocabulary, grammar, and syntax, and structures available to a writer in one language often are absent in another. Thus, while it is often necessary and acceptable to rely on translations (Neh. 7:73–8:12), readers should be aware that translation itself involves a degree of unavoidable interpretation.
A more general analysis of language is also useful. Understanding the typical patterns by which authors will string sentences together is necessary for following a writing’s train of thought. This tool, called “discourse analysis,” operates above the sentence level, attempting to understand and explain how sentences function in conjunction with one another in order to produce meaningful paragraphs, and how those paragraphs in turn operate within the overarching purpose of the discourse. These patterns of discourse can vary on the basis of book, author, language, culture, and literary genre, but there are also features of effective discourse common to all communication. Thus, while the principles and rules of communication are often intuitively grasped, understanding language, both generally and specifically, is foundational to the task of interpretation.
Literature and Literary Theory
The biblical writers are concerned not only with the informational content of their writing, but also with the manner in which that content is communicated. The words, patterns of speech, style, and imagery of any text provide significant insight into its purpose and message, apart from that text’s specific propositional content. The diversity of language used in the Gospels provides an example of this. Each of the four Gospel authors has a slightly different concern in his writing. John’s purpose, “that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31), explains his frequent use of courtroom language, such as “testimony” and “witness” (e.g., John 21:24). Mark, by contrast, sweeps the reader along a fast-paced and intensely personal exposition of Jesus’ life and death through the terseness and immediacy of his narration. Attention to these literary details allows the reader to more fully participate in the world of the text.
Such decisions will often depend upon a thorough analysis of genre. A reader naturally interprets historical narrative differently from poetry and didactic material. Furthermore, the conventions of different genres change over time. The book of Acts, for example, despite its essentially historical character, does not appear concerned with recording an exact dictation of the many speeches it reports, despite modern expectations that historical writing should be as precise as possible. The classification of ancient genres and the description of their respective conventions therefore require a good deal of analysis and sensitivity, but often such insights are provided by a careful and open reading of the text.
History
As the product of a particular author at a particular time, each book of the Bible is situated within its own unique historical context. Paul, for example, while perhaps conscious of the importance of his letters for posterity, wrote to specific churches or individuals with a singular purpose. This particularity of author, audience, and circumstance can often cause interpretative problems. Thus, while background studies are not always necessary to get the general idea of the author’s message, they can be invaluable in protecting readers from anachronism and enabling them to better appreciate the author’s purpose and perspective.
Historical study is assisted by specialized disciplines. Archaeology, for example, focuses on the beliefs, habits, practices, and history of ancient cultures, harnessing a wealth of evidence to that end. Similarly, anthropology and other social sciences are able to explore facets of modern cultures in order to better assess cross-cultural presuppositions and behaviors, many of which provide insight into ancient civilizations that shared similar attitudes. These methods provide the reader with the information necessary to understand a text in terms consistent with its cultural backdrop, highlighting both the similarities and the differences between the Bible and its environment. Recent discoveries of ancient Hittite treaties, for example, shed light on the “cutting ceremony” recorded in Gen. 15. These treaties detail similar ceremonies in which the vassal of a king would walk between hewed animal carcasses as a symbol of allegiance; if disobedience occurred, the vassal would share the fate of the animals. A similar ceremony occurs in Genesis, but with an interesting twist at the end: God, not Abram, passes through the pieces (15:17).
Humility and the Attitude of the Reader
Careful attention in interpretation requires a great deal of humility. It is difficult to overstate the importance of the attitude of the reader for an effective hermeneutic. Being a good reader requires willingness to share and participate in the world of the author and the text, a willingness that postpones judgment and expects personal change. This, in turn, requires a spirit of self-criticism, a commitment to defer one’s own presuppositions in favor of those of the text. Although readers are never able to fully distance themselves from their cultural situation and assumptions, the study of hermeneutics, among other things, can provide tools and skills for self-criticism and self-awareness, skills that enable the reader to better understand, appreciate, and appropriate the meaning of a text. Even a peripheral understanding of the complexities of interpretation can help readers develop an attitude of humility, imagination, and expectation as they approach the Scriptures.
Such humility is a prerequisite for application. The depth of meaning embedded in any text, and especially within the Bible, provides the humble reader with a rich and powerful tool for personal growth. Having better understood the world of the text on its own terms, readers are able to “project” that world onto themselves and their environment, to appropriate its meaning in a new and possibly foreign context. Thus, Jesus promises that those who hear, understand, and put his word into practice will yield a crop “some thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times what was sown” (Mark 4:20).
Unique Features of Biblical Interpretation
Certain unique features of the biblical text can create special opportunities and challenges for the Christian interpreter. These challenges are at work in the Bible’s own interpretation of itself. The Bible was written by many different authors over the course of a long period of history; it is therefore not surprising to find later authors reflecting on earlier periods. This innerbiblical interpretation offers the Christian insights into the unique nature of biblical hermeneutics and therefore provides a foundational model in approaching the Bible as the word of God.
The common and preeminent assumption that grounds innerbiblical interpretation is the commitment to ultimate divine authorship. Thus, the writer of Hebrews, though affirming the diversity of human authorship in the Bible (1:1), regularly introduces OT quotations with statements such as “God says” (1:5), “he spoke through David” (4:7), and “the Holy Spirit says” (3:7). Other writers tend to prefer the formula “it is written,” but each of these reflects a common presupposition that the Scriptures are ultimately delivered by God (2 Pet. 1:21).
Divine authorship means, at the very least, that there is a depth of meaning and purpose to the text, a depth often hidden even from the human author (1 Pet. 1:10–12). Psalm 2, for example, probably originally served as a coronation hymn used to celebrate the appointment of a new king in Israel. Yet the NT understands this psalm as a prophecy fulfilled in the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:33; Heb. 5:5). The intention of the original speaker can even be at odds with God’s intention, such as when Caiaphas claims, “It is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish” (John 11:50; cf. Acts 5:35–39). In this case, the irony of Caiaphas’s statement creates a powerful testimony, contrary to his intent, and is used by John to promote confidence in Jesus.
Furthermore, because the Scriptures are from God, they have a consistent and central focus. The NT unhesitatingly views all of Scripture, in all its diversity, as focused, by virtue of divine inspiration, on the person and work of Jesus Christ. This is seen in, for example, Luke 24:13–35, where the resurrected Jesus, “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” explains to his disciples “what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself” (cf. John 5:39; 12:41). This central focus on Christ requires the Christian interpreter to understand any individual verse in light of its context within the canon, to operate with the same assumption as the NT apostles, that all the Scriptures are concerned with testifying to Jesus the Christ.
Additionally, Paul views both Testaments as the special possession and once-for-all foundation of God’s church (Eph. 2:19–20; cf. Acts 2:42). The church, from a NT perspective, is the primary audience of the entirety of Scripture (1 Pet. 1:12) and is therefore uniquely entrusted with understanding and proclaiming its message (Matt. 28:18–20). While the Scriptures themselves are the only infallible guide for interpretation, believers should not forsake the teaching and tradition of the church (2 Thess. 2:15).
Finally, full understanding of the Bible requires the work of the Holy Spirit in conjunction with the faith of the reader. Belief and understanding go together (John 10:38), and both are the result of the unique work of the Holy Spirit (16:13). The proof that such understanding has taken place is the godly life of the believer (Rom. 2:13; James 1:22–25). The reverse is also true: disobedience works against understanding the riches of God’s Word (James 1:21). Such considerations underline the importance of the hermeneutical task. The tools and principles of hermeneutics are valuable only insofar as they enable the reader to better understand and appropriate the biblical message, to hear the word of God and respond appropriately.
The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesusfollowers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christembodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in humanhistory.
Introduction
Name.Early Christians combined the name “Jesus” with the title“Christ” (Acts 5:42; NIV: “Messiah”). Thename “Jesus,” from the Hebrew Yehoshua or Yeshua, was acommon male name in first-century Judaism. The title “Christ”is from the Greek christos, a translation of the Hebrew mashiakh(“anointed one, messiah”). Christians eventually werenamed after Jesus’ title (Acts 11:26). During the ministry ofJesus, Peter was the first disciple to recognize Jesus as the Messiah(Matt. 16:16; Mark 9:29; Luke 9:20).
Sources.From the viewpoint of Christianity, the life and ministry of Jesusconstitute the turning point in human history. From a historicalperspective, ample early source materials would be expected. Indeed,both Christian and non-Christian first-century and earlysecond-century literary sources are extant, but they are few innumber. In part, this low incidence is due to society’s initialresistance to the Jesus followers’ movement. The ancient Romanhistorian Tacitus called Christianity “a superstition,”since its beliefs did not fit with the culture’s prevailingworldview and thus were considered antisocial. Early literary sourcestherefore are either in-group documents or allusions in non-Christiansources.
TheNT Gospels are the principal sources for the life and ministry ofJesus. They consist of Matthew, Mark, Luke (the Synoptic Gospels),and John. Most scholars adhere to the so-called Four SourceHypothesis. In this theory, Mark was written first and was used as asource by Matthew and Luke, who also used the sayings source Q (fromGerman Quelle, meaning “source”) as well as their ownindividual sources M (Matthew) and L (Luke). John used additionalsources.
Theearly church tried to put together singular accounts, so-calledGospel harmonies, of the life of Jesus. The Gospel of the Ebionitesrepresents one such attempt based on the Synoptic Gospels. Anotherharmony, the Diatessaron, based on all four Gospels, was producedaround AD 170 by Tatian. Additional source materials concerning thelife of Christ are provided in the NT in texts such as Acts, thePauline Epistles, the General Epistles, and the Revelation of John.Paul wrote to the Galatians, “But when the time had fully come,God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law” (Gal. 4:4).The first narrative about Jesus by the Christian community was apassion narrative, the account of his death and resurrection. Thefirst extant references to this tradition are found in Paul’sletters (1Cor. 2:2; Gal. 3:1). The resurrection was recognizedfrom the beginning as the cornerstone of the Christian faith (1Cor.15:13–14).
Amongnon-Christian sources, the earliest reference to Jesus is found in aletter written circa AD 112 by Pliny the Younger, the Roman governorof Bithynia-Pontus (Ep. 10.96). The Roman historian Tacitus mentionsChristians and Jesus around AD 115 in his famous work about thehistory of Rome (Ann. 15.44). Another Roman historian, Suetonius,wrote around the same time concerning unrest among the Jews in Romebecause of a certain “Chrestos” (Claud. 25.4). Somescholars conclude that “Chrestos” is a misspelling of“Christos,” a reference to Jesus.
TheJewish author Josephus (first century AD) mentions Jesus in a storyabout the Jewish high priest Ananus and James the brother of Jesus(Ant. 20.200). A controversial reference to Jesus appears in adifferent part of the same work, where Josephus affirms that Jesus isthe Messiah and that he rose from the dead (Ant. 18.63–64). Themajority of scholars consider this passage to be authentic butheavily edited by later Christian copyists. Another Jewish source,the Talmud, also mentions Jesus in several places, but thesereferences are very late and of little historical value.
NoncanonicalGospels that mention Jesus include, for example, the Infancy Gospelof Thomas, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel ofJames, the Gospel of Judas Iscariot, the Gospel of the Hebrews, theEgerton Gospel, and the Gospel of Judas. Although some of these maycontain an occasional authentic saying or event, for the most partthey are late and unreliable.
Jesus’Life
Birthand childhood. TheGospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehemduring the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesuswas probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’sdeath (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of avirginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18;Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governorQuirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place inBethlehem (2:1–5). Both the census and the governorship at thetime of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars.Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to eitherconfirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must bedetermined on the basis of one’s view regarding the generalreliability of the Gospel tradition.
Onthe eighth day after his birth, Jesus was circumcised, in keepingwith the Jewish law, at which time he officially was named “Jesus”(Luke 2:21). He spent his growing years in Nazareth, in the home ofhis parents, Joseph and Mary (2:40). Of the NT Gospels, the Gospel ofLuke contains the only brief portrayal of Jesus’ growth instrength, wisdom, and favor with God and people (2:40, 52). Luke alsocontains the only account of Jesus as a young boy (2:41–49).
Jesuswas born in a lower socioeconomic setting. His parents offered atemple sacrifice appropriate for those who could not afford tosacrifice a sheep (Luke 2:22–24; cf. Lev. 12:8). Joseph, Jesus’earthly father, was a carpenter or an artisan in wood, stone, ormetal (Matt. 13:55). From a geographical perspective, Nazareth wasnot a prominent place for settling, since it lacked fertile ground.Jesus’ disciple Nathanael expressed an apparently commonfirst-century sentiment concerning Nazareth: “Nazareth! Cananything good come from there?” (John 1:46).
Jesuswas also born in a context of scandal. Questions of illegitimacy weresurely raised, since his mother Mary was discovered to be pregnantbefore her marriage to Joseph. According to Matthew, only theintervention of an angel convinced Joseph not to break his betrothal(Matt. 1:18–24). Jesus’ birth took place in Bethlehem,far from his parents’ home in Nazareth. According to kinshiphospitality customs, Joseph and Mary would have expected to stay withdistant relatives in Bethlehem. It is likely that they were unwelcomebecause of Jesus’ status as an illegitimate child; thus Maryhad to give birth elsewhere and place the infant Jesus in a feedingtrough (Luke 2:7). A similar response was seen years later inNazareth when Jesus was identified as “Mary’s son”(Mark 6:3) rather than through his paternal line, thereby shaming himas one who was born an illegitimate child. Jesus was likewiserejected at the end of his life as the crowds cried, “Crucifyhim!” (Matt. 27:22–23; Mark 15:13–14; Luke 23:21;John 19:6, 15). When Jesus was arrested, most of his followers fled(Matt. 26:56; Mark 14:50–52), and a core disciple, Peter,vehemently denied knowing him (Matt. 26:69–74; Mark 14:66–71;Luke 22:55–60; John 18:15–17, 25–27). His ownsiblings did not believe in him (John 7:5) and were evidently ashamedof his fate, since from the cross Jesus placed the care of his motherinto the hands of “the disciple whom he loved” (19:26–27)rather than the next brother in line, as was customary.
Baptism,temptation, and start of ministry.After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring tohim as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22).Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instantministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into thewilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11;Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that thetemptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Lukeidentify three specific temptations by the devil, though their orderfor the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesuswas tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine interventionafter jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’skingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation,quoting Scripture in response.
Matthewand Mark record that Jesus began his ministry in Capernaum inGalilee, after the arrest of John the Baptist (Matt. 4:12–13;Mark 1:14). Luke says that Jesus started his ministry at about thirtyyears of age (3:23). This may be meant to indicate full maturity orperhaps correlate this age with the onset of the service of theLevites in the temple (cf. Num. 4:3). John narrates the beginning ofJesus’ ministry by focusing on the calling of the disciples andthe sign performed at a wedding at Cana (1:35–2:11).
Jesus’public ministry: chronology.Jesus’ ministry started in Galilee, probably around AD 27/28,and ended with his death around AD 30 in Jerusalem. The temple hadbeen forty-six years in construction (generally interpreted as thetemple itself and the wider temple complex) when Jesus drove out themoney changers (John 2:20). According to Josephus, the rebuilding andexpansion of the second temple had started in 20/19 BC, during theeighteenth year of Herod’s reign (Ant. 15.380). The ministry ofJohn the Baptist had commenced in the fifteenth year of Tiberius(Luke 3:1–2), who had become a coregent in AD 11/12. From thesedates of the start of the temple building and the correlation of thereign of Tiberius to John the Baptist’s ministry, the onset ofJesus’ ministry can probably be dated to AD 27/28.
TheGospel of John mentions three Passovers and another unnamed feast inJohn 5:1. The length of Jesus’ ministry thus extended overthree or four Passovers, equaling about three or three and a halfyears. Passover, which took place on the fifteenth of Nisan, came ona Friday in AD 30 and 33. The year of Jesus’ death wastherefore probably AD 30.
Jesus’ministry years may be divided broadly into his Galilean and hisJudean ministries. The Synoptic Gospels describe the ministry inGalilee from various angles but converge again as Jesus enters Judea.
Galileanministry.The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and aroundGalilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that thekingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment ofprophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ firstteaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30);the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for hiscalling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection andsuffering.
AllGospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in hisGalilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioningof the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers isrecorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministryis the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, inparticular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synopticsfocus on healings and exorcisms.
DuringJesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with hisidentity. However, evil spirits knew him to be of supreme authority(Mark 3:11). Jesus was criticized by outsiders and by his own family(3:21). The scribes from Jerusalem identified him as a partner ofBeelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesustold parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growingkingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humblebeginnings (4:1–32).
TheSynoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful.No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority orability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized manydemons (Mark 5:1–13), raised the dead (Mark 5:35–42), fedfive thousand (Mark 6:30–44), and walked on water (Mark6:48–49).
Inthe later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew andtraveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are notwritten with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns toGalilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey toJerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fearresolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee,where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ discipleswith lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed thePharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents(7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demandinga sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, whoconfessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus didprovide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).
Jesuswithdrew from Galilee to Tyre and Sidon, where a Syrophoenician womanrequested healing for her daughter. Jesus replied, “I was sentonly to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Galileans hadlong resented the Syrian provincial leadership partiality thatallotted governmental funds in ways that made the Jews receive mere“crumbs.” Consequently, when the woman replied, “Eventhe dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table,”Jesus applauded her faith (Matt. 15:27–28). Healing a deaf-muteman in the Decapolis provided another example of Jesus’ministry in Gentile territory (Mark 7:31–37). Peter’sconfession of Jesus as the Christ took place during Jesus’travel to Caesarea Philippi, a well-known Gentile territory. The citywas the ancient center of worship of the Hellenistic god Pan.
Judeanministry.Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry ashe resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually ledto his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem intothree phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27).The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of thejourney. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, andthe demands on discipleship intensified as Jesus approached Jerusalem(Matt. 20:17–19, 26–28; Mark 10:38–39, 43–45;Luke 14:25–35). Luke presents the second phase of the journeytoward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvationand judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase ofthe journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are themain themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).
Socialconflicts with religious leaders increased throughout Jesus’ministry. These conflicts led to lively challenge-riposteinteractions concerning the Pharisaic schools of Shammai and Hillel(Matt. 19:1–12; Mark 10:1–12). Likewise, socioeconomicfeathers were ruffled as Jesus welcomed young children, who hadlittle value in society (Matt. 19:13–15; Mark 10:13–16;Luke 18:15–17).
PassionWeek, death, and resurrection. Eachof the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with thecrowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Lukedescribes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during whichJesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).
InJerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17).Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because thewhole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “beganlooking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segmentof Jerusalem’s temple leadership inquired about Jesus’authority (11:27–33). Jesus replied with cunning questions(12:16, 35–36), stories (12:1–12), denunciation(12:38–44), and a prediction of Jerusalem’s owndestruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, JudasIscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’arrest (14:10–11).
Atthe Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a newcovenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29;Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned thedisciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and laterhe prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agonyand submissiveness in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–42;Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–42). His arrest, trial,crucifixion, death, and resurrection followed (Matt. 26:46–28:15;Mark 14:43–16:8; Luke 22:47–24:9; John 18:1–20:18).Jesus finally commissioned his disciples to continue his mission bymaking disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:8)and ascended to heaven with the promise that he will one day return(Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:9–11).
TheIdentity of Jesus Christ
Variousaspects of Jesus’ identity are stressed in the four NT Gospels,depending on their target audiences. In the Gospels the witnesses toJesus’ ministry are portrayed as constantly questioning andexamining his identity (Matt. 11:2–5; 12:24; 26:63; 27:11; Mark3:22; 8:11; 11:28; 14:61; Luke 7:18–20; 11:15; 22:67, 70;23:39; John 7:20, 25–27; 18:37). Only beings of the spiritualrealm are certain of his divinity (Mark 1:34; 3:11; Luke 4:41). AtJesus’ baptism, God referred to him as his Son, whom he loved(Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Likewise, when Jesus wastransfigured in the presence of Peter, James, and John, a voiceaffirmed, “This is my Son, whom I love” (Matt. 17:5; Mark9:7). At the moment of his death, the questioning of Jesus’identity culminated in a confession by a Roman centurion and otherguards: “Surely he was the Son of God!” (Matt. 27:54; cf.Mark 15:39).
Miracleworker.In the first-century setting, folk healers and miracle workers werepart of the fabric of society. Jesus, however, performed signs andmiracles in order to demonstrate the authority of the kingdom of Godover various realms: disease, illness, the spiritual world, nature,and even future events. Especially in the Gospel of John, Jesus’signs and miracles are used to show his authority and thus hisidentity.
Nochallenge superseded Jesus’ authority. Among his ample miraclesand signs, he changed water into wine (John 2:7–9), calmed astorm in the sea (Matt. 8:23–27; Mark 4:35–39; Luke8:22–25), exorcized demons (Matt. 9:32–34; Mark 5:1–13;Luke 9:42–43), healed the sick (Mark 1:40–44), raised thedead (Matt. 9:23–25; Mark 5:35–42; Luke 7:1–16;8:49–54; John 11:17, 38–44), performed miraculousfeedings (Matt. 14:17–21; 15:34–38; Mark 6:30–44;8:5–9; Luke 9:10–17; John 6:8–13), and walked onwater (Matt. 14:25–26; Mark 6:48–49; John 6:19).
ThePharisees requested miracles as evidence of his authority (Mark8:11–12). Jesus refused, claiming that a wicked and adulterousgeneration asks for a miraculous sign (Matt. 12:38–39; 16:1–4).The only sign that he would give was the sign of Jonah—hisdeath and resurrection three days later—a personal sacrifice,taking upon himself the judgment of the world (Matt. 12:39–41).
Rabbi/teacher.Jesus’ teaching style was similar to other first-century rabbisor Pharisees (Mark 9:5; 10:51; John 1:38; 3:2). What distinguishedhim was that he spoke with great personal authority (Matt. 5:22, 28,32, 39, 44; Mark 1:22). Like other rabbis of his day, Jesus gathereddisciples. He called these men to observe his lifestyle and to joinhim in his ministry of teaching, healing, and exorcism (Matt. 10:1–4;Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16).
Jesusused a variety of teaching methods. He frequently spoke in parables(Matt. 6:24; 13:24–52; 18:10–14, 23–35;21:28–22:14; 24:32–36, 45–51; 25:14–30; Mark4:1–34; 12:1–12; 13:28–34; Luke 8:4–18;12:41–46; 13:18–21; 14:15–24; 15:1–16:15,19–31; 18:1–14; 19:11–27; 20:9–19; 21:29–33),used figures of speech (John 10:9), hyperbole (Matt. 19:24; Mark10:25; Luke 18:25), argumentation (Matt. 26:11), object lessons(Matt. 24:32), frequent repetition (Matt. 13:44–47; Luke13:18–21), practical examples, and personal guidance.
Majorthemes in Jesus’ teaching include the kingdom of God, the costof discipleship, internal righteousness, the end of the age, hisidentity, his mission, and his approaching death. In his teachings,observance of Torah was given new context and meaning because God’skingdom had “come near” (Matt. 3:2). Jesus had come tofulfill the law (Matt. 5:17).
Jesus’teaching ministry often took place amid social conflict. Theseconflicts were couched in so-called challenge-riposte interactions inwhich the honor status of those involved was at stake. Jesus usedthese interactions as teachable moments. When questioned, Jesus gavereplies that reveal omniscience or intimate knowledge of God’swill, especially in the Gospel of John. In the Synoptic Gospels,Jesus’ answers are both ethical and practical in nature. TheSynoptics portray Jesus as challenged repeatedly with accusations ofviolating customs specified in the Jewish law. Jesus’ answersto such accusations often echoed the essence of 1Sam. 15:22,“To obey is better than sacrifice,” phrased by Jesus as“I desire mercy, not sacrifice” (Matt. 9:13; 12:7). Anoverall “better than” ethic was common in Jesus’public teaching.
TheSermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7) contains a “better than”ethic in which internal obedience is better than mere outwardobedience. For example, Jesus said that anger without cause is equalto murder (Matt. 5:21–22), that looking at a woman lustfullyamounts to adultery (Matt. 5:28), and that instead of revengingwrongs one must reciprocate with love (Matt. 5:38–48). Jesusvalued compassion above traditions and customs, even those containedwithin the OT law. He desired internal obedience above the letter ofthe law.
Jesus’teachings found their authority in the reality of God’simminent kingdom (Matt. 3:2; 10:7; Mark 1:15; Luke 10:9),necessitating repentance (Matt. 3:2), belief (Mark 1:15), dependence(Matt. 18:3–5; Mark 10:15), and loyalty to a new community—thefamily of Jesus followers (Mark 3:34; 10:29–30). Jesus urged,“Seek first [God’s] kingdom and his righteousness”(Matt. 6:33). Preaching with such urgency was common among propheticteachers of the intertestamental period. Jesus, however, had his owngrounds for urgency. He held that God deeply valued all humans (Matt.10:31) and would bring judgment swiftly (Matt. 25:31–46).
Examplesof a “greater good” ethic in the Synoptics include theoccasions when Jesus ate with sinners (Mark 2:16–17). Jesusused an aphorism in response to accusations about his associationswith sinners, saying, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor,but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners”(Mark 2:17). He advocated harvesting and healing on the Sabbath (Mark2:23–28; 3:1–6), and when he was accused of breaking thelaw, he pointed to an OT exception (1Sam. 21:1–6) todeclare compassion appropriate for the Sabbath. Jesus also appliedthe “greater good” ethic in the case of divorce, sincewomen suffered the societal stigma of adultery and commonly becameoutcasts following divorce (Matt. 19:8–9; Mark 10:5–9).
Jesus’kingdom teachings were simultaneously spiritual, ethical, andeschatological in application. The teachings were aimed at internaltransformation (Matt. 5:3–9; 18:3; Mark 10:15) and spurring onlove (Matt. 5:44; 7:21). The Spirit of the Lord had called Jesus tobless the hurting ones as they aspired to a godly character. Jesustaught, “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father isperfect” (Matt. 5:48), and “Be merciful, just as yourFather is merciful” (Luke 6:36). The “blessed” onesin Jesus’ teachings are poor of spirit, peace driven, mournful,and hungry for righteousness, consumed with emulating godlycharacter.
Somescholars believe that Jesus promoted an “interim ethic”for the kingdom, intended only for a short period prior to the end oftime. However, he was explicit regarding the longevity of histeachings: “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words willnever pass away” (Matt. 24:35; Luke 16:17).
Messiah.The concept of an anointed one, a messiah, who would restore theglories of David’s kingdom and bring political stability wascommon in Jewish expectation. Both before and after the Babyloniancaptivity, many Jews longed for one who would bring peace andprotection. Israel’s prophets had spoken of a coming deliverer,one who would restore David’s kingdom and reign in justice andrighteousness (2Sam. 7:11–16; Isa. 9:1–7; 11:1–16;Jer. 23:5–6; 33:15–16; Ezek. 37:25; Dan. 2:44; Mic. 5:2;Zech. 9:9). Isaiah’s description of the servant (Isa. 53) whosesuffering healed the nation provided a slightly different angle ofexpectation in terms of a deliverer.
Jesus’authority and popularity as a miracle worker called up messianicimages in first-century Jewish minds. On several occasions hearerscalled him “Son of David,” hoping for the Messiah (Matt.12:23; 21:9). Simon Peter was the first follower who confessed Jesusas the Christ, the “Messiah” (Matt. 16:16; Mark 8:29). Inline with Isaiah’s model of the Suffering Servant, Jesusfocused not on political ends but rather on spiritual regenerationthrough his own sacrificial death (Mark 10:45).
Eschatologicalprophet.Many scholars claim that Jesus is best understood as a Jewishapocalypticist, an eschatological prophet who expected God tointervene in history, destroy the wicked, and bring in the kingdom ofGod. Central in this understanding are Jesus’ propheciesconcerning the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem (Matt. 24:1–2,15–22; Mark 13:1; Luke 21:5–24; John 2:19; Acts 6:14). Inaddition, it is noted that Jesus had twelve disciples, representativeof the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:2–28; Luke 22:23–30).Certain of Jesus’ parables, those with apocalyptic images ofcoming judgment, present Jesus as an eschatological prophet (Matt.24:45–25:30; Luke 12:41–46; 19:11–27).
SufferingSon of God.Jesus’ first recorded teaching in a synagogue in Nazareth wasparadigmatic (Luke 4:16–21). He attributed the reading, Isa.61:1–2, to his personal calling to serve, and in doing so herevealed a trajectory of suffering. The Gospel of Mark likewise aptlyportrays Jesus as the suffering Son of God. Jesus’ ownteachings incorporated his upcoming suffering (Mark 8:31; 9:12–13,31; 10:33–34). He summarized his mission by declaring, “TheSon of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give hislife as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). His earthly careerended with a trial in Jerusalem consisting of both Roman and Jewishcomponents (Matt. 26:57–68; 27:1–31; Mark 14:53–65;15:1–20; Luke 22:54–23:25; John 18:19–24;18:28–19:16). He was insulted, scourged, mocked, and crucified.
Jesus’suffering culminated in his humiliating death by crucifixion (Matt.27:33–50; Mark 15:22–37; Luke 23:33–46; John19:16–30). Crucifixion was a death of unimaginable horror,bringing shame and humiliation to the victim and his family. Anyonehanging on a tree was considered cursed (Deut. 21:23; Gal. 3:13).Thus, especially in a Jewish society, anyone associated with acrucified person bore the shame of following one who was executed asa lowly slave and left as a cursed corpse. The apostle Paul referredto this shame of the cross when he stated, “I am not ashamed ofthe gospel” (Rom. 1:16).
ExaltedLord.Jesus had prophesied that he would rise again (Matt. 16:21; 17:9, 23;20:19; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:34; Luke 9:22; 18:33; 24:7, 46).The testimony of the Synoptics is that the resurrection of JesusChrist indeed occurred on the third day, Christ having died on Friday(Mark 15:42–45; Luke 23:52–54; John 19:30–33) andrisen again on Sunday (Matt. 28:1–7; Mark 16:2–7; Luke24:1–7; John 20:1–16). The resurrected Jesus waswitnessed by the women (Matt. 28:8–9), the eleven disciples(Matt. 28:16–17; Luke 24:36–43), and travelers on theroad to Emmaus (Luke 24:31–32). According to Paul, he appearedto as many as five hundred others (1Cor. 15:6). He appeared inbodily form, spoke, showed his scars, and ate (Luke 24:39–43;John 20:27; Acts 1:4). After forty postresurrection days, Jesusascended into the heavenly realm (Acts 1:9).
Asmuch as Jesus’ death was the epitome of shame, his victory overdeath was his ultimate exaltation (Phil. 2:5–11). At Pentecost,Peter proclaimed that in the resurrection God fulfilled OT promises(Ps. 16:10) by raising his Son from the grave (Acts 2:30–31).Furthermore, Christ provided freedom from the law through hisresurrection (Rom. 5:13–14), God’s approval of his lifeand work (Phil. 2:8–9), and God’s designation of him asLord over all the earth, the living and the dead (Acts 17:30–31;Phil. 2:10; Heb. 1:3), and over all his enemies (Eph. 1:20–23).
Jesus’exaltation commenced the beginning of forgiveness and justification(Luke 24:46–47; Acts 13:30–39; Rom. 4:25) and hisintercession for the people of God (Rom. 8:34). His ascensionsignaled the coming of the Holy Spirit as comforter and teacher (John14:26; Acts 2:33) and was accompanied by the promise of his return inglory (Luke 24:51), at which time he will render judgment (Matt.19:28; 24:31; Rev. 20:11–15) and establish his eternal kingdom(1Cor. 15:24; 2Tim. 4:1; Rev. 11:15; 22:5).
Jesus’Purpose and Community
Inthe Gospel of Matthew, Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah, whopreaches the good news of the kingdom, urging people to repent(4:17–23). Repentance and belief allow one to enter thekingdom. The call into the kingdom is a call into a new covenant, onemade in Jesus’ blood (26:28).
Inthe prologue to the Gospel of Mark, the narrator reveals the identityof Jesus (1:1). Jesus is presented as the one who brings good tidingsof salvation (cf. Isa. 40:9; 52:7; 61:1). The centrality of thegospel, the good news (Mark 1:14–15), is evident.
Lukelikewise presents the preaching of the good news as a main purpose ofJesus’ ministry (4:43). The content of this good news is thekingdom of God (4:43; 8:1; 16:16). When the disciples of John theBaptist asked Jesus if he was the one who was to come (7:20), Jesusanswered, “Go back and report to John what you have seen andheard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosyare cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good newsis proclaimed to the poor” (7:22). The kingdom of God, aspresented in Luke, brings freedom for the prisoners, recovery ofsight for the blind, and release for the oppressed (4:18). Jesus’healings and exorcisms announce the coming kingdom of God alreadypresent in the ministry of Jesus (4:40–44; 6:18–20;8:1–2; 9:2; 10:8–9).
Inthe Gospel of John, Jesus testifies to the good news by way of signsthroughout his ministry. These signs point to Jesus’ glory, hisidentity, and the significance of his ministry. Jesus is the Messiah,the Son of God, who offers eternal and abundant life. This abundantlife is lived out in community.
Inthe Gospel of John, the disciples of Jesus represent the community ofGod (17:21). The disciples did not belong to the world, but theycontinued to live in the world (17:14–16). Throughout hisministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a callto loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38;Luke 9:23–26), a call to the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50;Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock Iwill build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call tocommunity. Jesus’ presence as the head of the community wasreplaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18).
Jesus’ministry continued in the community of Jesus’ followers, God’sfamily—the church. Entrance into the community was obtained byadopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and through theinitiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26;Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–62; John 1:12; 3:16;10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9).
TheQuests for the Historical Jesus
Thequest for the historical Jesus, or seeking who Jesus was from ahistorical perspective, is a modern phenomenon deemed necessary byscholars who claim that the NT Gospels were written long after Jesus’death and were heavily influenced by the post-Easter understanding ofthe church.
Thebeginning of this quest is often dated to 1770, when the lecturenotes of Hermann Samuel Reimarus were published posthumously.Reimarus had launched an inquiry into the identity of Jesus thatrejected as inauthentic all supernatural elements in the Gospels. Heconcluded that the disciples invented Jesus’ miracles,prophecies, ritualistic religion, and resurrection. Reimarus’sconclusions were not widely accepted, but they set off a flurry ofrationalistic research into the historical Jesus that continuedthroughout the nineteenth century. This became known as the “firstquest” for the historical Jesus.
In1906 German theologian Albert Schweit-zer published The Quest of theHistorical Jesus (German title: Von Reimarus zu Wrede: EineGeschichte der Leben-Jesu-Forschung), a scathing indictment of thefirst quest. Schweitzer’s work showed that nineteenth-centuryresearchers re-created Jesus in their own image, transforming thehistorical Jesus into a modern philanthropist preaching aninoffensive message of love and brotherhood. Schweitzer’sconclusions marked the beginning of the end for this first quest.Schweitzer himself concluded that the historical Jesus was aneschatological prophet whose purposes failed during his last days inJerusalem.
Withthe demise of the first quest, some NT scholars, such as RudolfBultmann, rejected any claim to being able to discover the historicalJesus. This trend continued until 1953, when some of Bultmann’sformer students launched what has come to be known as the “newquest” for the historical Jesus (1953–c. 1970). Thisquest created new interest in the historical Jesus but was stilldominated by the view that the portrait of Jesus in the Gospels islargely a creation of the church in a post-Easter setting.
Asthe rebuilding years of the post–World WarII era wanedand scholars started to reap academic fruit from major archaeologicalfinds such as the DSS, research on the historical Jesus moved on towhat has been called the “third quest.” This quest seeksespecially to research and understand Jesus in his social andcultural setting.
Until the twentieth century, traveling farther than a week’sdistance from home was dangerous and expensive. We should notoverstate the difficulty or risks of travel then, but certainly itwas unlike today. Since virtually every region had its own currency,travelers carried cash and were at risk from thieves, money changers,innkeepers, slavers, and others who preyed upon travelers, as well asfrom the natural dangers of storms, floods, early snows, and soforth. Outside of cities, there was little law enforcement for thetypical traveler (Ezra 8:22). Family was often one’s onlydefender against injustice (Gen. 14:12–16; Ps. 127:3–5).
Fortravelers in the biblical world, improvement was slow and gradual.During the time of the patriarchs, travelers faced poor roads,bandits, and no security other than what they could providethemselves (Gen. 14:14). Later Assyrian documents complain ofdifficult roads. SargonII (r. 722–705 BC) boasted, “Iadvanced over inaccessible paths (in) steep and terrifying places”(ARAB 2:25–26). Sennacherib (r. 705–681 BC) tells ofhaving to travel on foot because the road was too steep for hislitter (ARAB 2:122–23). Persian roads improved modestly, butHerodotus probably is exaggerating the improvements (Hist. 8.98), asXenophon seems to indicate (Anab. 1.2.25). Many sources speak ofbandits (Ezra 8:31; Hos. 6:9). Thus, safe travel or good roads becamea metaphor for peace. When ancient kings bragged, it often was aboutroads they had built or how the roads were now safe. The arrival ofthe kingdom of God was symbolized by repairing the road (Isa. 40:3–5;Luke 3:4–6).
Majorimprovements came with the Roman Empire. For the first (and last)time, a traveler could go from the Euphrates to Egypt to Britain onwell-policed roads and sea lanes under one’s own government.Enforced law and standardized, trustworthy coinage had distinctadvantages (Isa. 33:8; Matt. 22:15–22).
Runningempires required traveling. Envoys (Jer. 27:3), tax collectors (Dan.11:20), and overseers (1Kings 5:13–17), as well asarmies, moved about on imperial business. While farmers and localmerchants traveled limited distances to sell their wares (usually tothe closest large city), fortunes could be made by the moreadventuresome merchant willing to take the greater risks of travelingfarther distances (Gen. 37:28; 1Kings 10; Job 6:19; Prov.31:14; Isa. 23:8; Matt. 13:45). The ancient world also sawindividuals doing a great deal of local travel (less than sixtymiles), usually connected to business (Prov. 31:14), religiousfestivals (1Sam. 1; John 10), and family (Gen. 50:1–14;2Kings 8:29; Luke 1:39; John 2:1); often the three were woventogether.
Travelin the ancient world was by sea or land. Except for the wealthy, thismeant booking passage or walking. Sentimental images of a pregnantMary riding a donkey to Bethlehem or of the apostle Paul doingmissionary travels on horseback are likely fiction. Although there issome evidence of women traveling on donkeys (Josh. 15:18; 1Sam.25:20, 23; 2Sam. 16:1–2), the stories are of prominentwomen or unusual occasions; it should not be assumed to be normative.Obviously, the infirm rode when required to travel, but theypreferred not to travel (2Sam. 19:26–37). The wealthiestused private transport (Acts 8:27–28). We have references totravel by donkey, mule, camel, horse, cart, litter, and chariot, butordinary people walked. Typically, a good day’s walk was twentymiles; sea travel was by daylight and averaged roughly the same.Calculating how long it took someone to travel, though, is not merelya matter of math. Both sea and land travelers were fair-weathertravelers, usually between June and September. On a long journey, onehad to plan where to “winter.” Ancient travelers had tomake their travel plans around the seasons.
Travelby Land
Roads.Until the Romans, a “road” was merely a cleared path.They were ungraded and often impassable in wet weather. Nonetheless,they followed a distinct route, marked by “guideposts”(Jer. 31:21). In the ancient world, major roads ran east-west fromSyria into Mesopotamia. North-south roads connected Syria to Egypt,through Palestine. The Assyrian army invaded Israel by traveling weston the road as far as Syria and then turning south. The battlesfought in Gen. 14 were to control the north-south road (and thustrade). Solomon built wealth by controlling this trade (2Chron.9:14). Three major roads ran north-south through Israel. (1)TheKing’s Highway (Num. 20:17) ran through the eastern region,from Damascus through the eastern highlands of the Transjordan anddown to the Gulf of Aqaba, where Solomon maintained a port (2Chron.8:17). (2)The central (or Sinai) road ran from Sidon south toTyre, Akko, Shechem, Jerusalem, Hebron, Beersheba, Kadesh Barnea,into the Negev, and on to Egypt. (3)The Sea Road (Via Maris)ran from Damascus to Hazor through the Valley of Jezreel (the Plainof Esdraelon through the Megiddo Pass), down the coast of Israelthrough Gaza and into Egypt. Taking Megiddo meant controlling thisroad and the trade. The Egyptians (ThutmoseIII) defeated theCanaanites and took this road around 1468 BC. David captured it about1000 BC. Josiah died defending this road against the Egyptians(NechoII) in 609 BC.
TheGreeks extended a major road connecting through Asia Minor to theancient road running into Mesopotamia. The Romans built roads of flatstone placed upon foundations. Parts of these roads are still in usetoday. From Rome they built to the sea (Via Ostiensis, ViaPortuensis), to the south (Via Appia), to the west (Via Aurelia), tothe north (Via Flaminia), to the Adriatic (Via Salaria, Via Valeria),and to the east (Via Ignatia) connecting Rome to Greece and thus tothe rest of the biblical world.
Lodgings.Land travel necessitated lodgings. The wealthy near Rome often hadhomes along the common routes that they plied. Slaves ran ahead toannounce that the master was coming. Friends and those on themaster’s business likely used these homes as well whentraveling. When off the normal route, an aristocrat traveled with aretinue of servants, wagons, and tents to enable a well-equipped (andsecure) camp each evening. The ordinary traveler had no extra homesor entourages. Groups large enough for safety could camp near town.Individuals relied upon hospitality in town. Those individualtravelers unfortunate to lack any kinship with townsfolk often had norecourse but inns. Petronius (Sat. 94–97) tells a seamy storyof misadventures in the roadside inns of his day. Archaeology andliterature describe ill-kept dumps involving disreputableproprietors, questionable guests, and plenty of loose morals. AncientHebrews and early Christians emphasized hospitality (Gen. 19:1–2;Judg. 19:11–20; Rom. 12:13; 1Pet. 4:9; 3John 8).
Distanceand duration.Using the distances between ancient stopping places, travel records,and comments in literary sources, scholars generally agree that anormal walking traveler could expect to cover twenty miles in a day.Peter’s trip from Joppa to Caesarea (about forty miles) tooktwo days (Acts 10:23–30). Travelers using beasts of burdengenerally covered the same distance. Chariots averaged a bit better,perhaps twenty-five to thirty miles per day. Whether they actuallytraveled farther or just stopped earlier for the night is debatable.Horseback was intended for speed and could easily average fifty milesper day. Yet we must avoid the mistake of calculating travel timebetween places by simple math. While such calculations generally holdtrue for one- or two-day journeys (Acts 10), longer journeysencountered delays. Towns along main roads were commonly spaced aday’s walk apart. Yet it is unwise to assume that a traveleralways left the next morning after an overnight stay. Jesus warnedhis traveling preachers against such rudeness (Luke 10:5–7).Moreover, the host likely provided the food supplies and extra fundsfor the traveler’s next walk (3John 5–8; Did.11.5–6). Certainly, Jewish travelers were affected by Sabbathsand feasts. Not only would they not travel on those days, but alsothey likely would delay or rush to reach a particular location (Acts20:2–5, 16; 1Cor. 16:8). Ancients traveled according to adifferent tempo than modern Westerners.
Seasonscaused more serious delays. When traveling season ended, travelerswere forced to spend the winter wherever they were at that time. Ifpossible, they did not leave this to chance but rather planned whereto “winter” (Jer. 36:22; Acts 27:12; 1Cor. 16:6;Titus 3:12). Terrain was a serious consideration. Mountain passes andriver fords were obvious factors, and ancients often took the easier(or safer) though longer path. Hence, there were three roads leadingfrom Perga to Pisidian Antioch, the longest (western) being thesafest and easiest. Uphill journeys, snow-blocked passes, and flashfloods slowed ancient travelers, sometimes stranding them longer thantheir planned supplies would last (2Cor. 6:5).
Travelingin groups. Sincetravelers carried money, they avoided traveling alone or in verysmall groups. (The so-called wise men of Matt. 2:1–12 almostcertainly would have been waylaid had there been only three of them.)Commonly, travelers gathered in the agora (marketplace) early in themorning looking for fellow travelers heading their way, thus makingtraveling companions of those with whom they might not normallyassociate (Luke 9:57; 14:25). It was also common for travelers tojoin others along the road (Luke 24:13–16; Acts 8:27–30).
Travelby Sea
Ships.Almost all ancient ships were wooden. A “fast ship” wasnot necessarily a sleeker mode, but a dry one. Ideally, ships werestored out of the water during winter. Waterlogged ships werenaturally slower.
Nobiblical empire was worth its salt unless it had naval supremacy inthe Mediterranean Sea. Sailing vessels were at the mercy of the wind,so military ships meant galley ships. Rowing allowed captains to movewithout the wind. Today, we tend to imagine rowers like the “galleyslaves” of the Middle Ages. Ancient rowers, however, werehonored soldiers. Ships rammed each other in battle, and skill at theoar often meant the difference between victory and death. Once theenemy was rammed, rowers sprang up from their oars and fought hand tohand.
Piracyand commerce.No one could claim dominance of the sea without controlling piracy.The Roman navy, for the first time in history, managed to virtuallyeliminate piracy. Roman archers and slingers rained destruction asthey drew near pirate vessels. Catapults later were added for heavyartillery. Finally, firepots slung out on long poles set fire to theenemy’s ship, which the Romans then rammed and boarded.
Withthe taming of the Mediterranean, commercial shipping exploded ingrowth. Transporting cargo, passengers, and dispatches becameprofitable business. Smaller ships (like a Galilean fishing boat)depended upon oars, with a small sail as an auxiliary. Largermerchant ships depended more on sails. Sailing ships, with favorablewinds, probably averaged between two and four miles per hour, butonly half that with unfavorable winds. Ancient ships huggedcoastlines and avoided bad weather.
Commoncargo ships carried an average of about 250 tons of cargo and/orpassengers and ranged from 70 to 150 feet in length. Those carrying350 to 500 tons were considered large but not rare. It is thoughtthat the grain ships in Paul’s day (as in Acts 27) routinelywere three-decked, 180 feet long, carried 1,300 tons, and took over aweek to unload.
Travelingby ship.Although cargo ships also carried passengers, some ships wereprimarily for passengers. Josephus, on an unsuccessful attempt tosail to Rome, was on a ship with six hundred passengers (Josephus,Life 15). Sallust, a Roman historian, mentions a cohort (about 600men) traveling on one transport ship (Hist. 3.8). Paul’s shipto Rome had 276 aboard (Acts 27:37). Acts gives the impression thatthis ship left too late in the season. Aside from those compelled byRome, likely only the brave or the desperate would book such passage.Thus, we should not assume that the ship was fully booked.
Likeland travel, however, sea travel also was restricted by season. Inthe eastern half of the Mediterranean, the wind blows from thenorthwest toward the southeast persistently from June to September,marking the favorable sailing season. Vegetius (Mil. 4.39) writes,“From the 6th day before the kalends of June [May 27] until therising of Arcturus, that is until the 18th before the kalends ofOctober [Sept. 14], is believed to be the safe period ofnavigation.... From then up to the 3rd before theides of November, navigation is uncertain.... Fromthe 3rd before the ides of November to the 6th before the ides ofMarch, the seas are closed.” Many ancient writers indicatedthat sea travel in the winter was trecherous.
Aperson traveling by sea went first to the docks to inquire aboutships headed to the desired destination. Harbor managers, dockhands,sailors, or others pointed inquirers toward appropriate ships. Afternegotiating with a particular ship’s purser, whose job was tobook passengers (and guard against stowaways), a passenger was toldwhat day and time to be aboard. The lowest level of ships held theballast (usually sand or stone) and the bilgewater. Decking over itheld cargo. Some ships berthed the cheapest passengers in this area,what we now refer to as steerage (Lucian observes that suchpassengers were “not even able to stretch their legs on thebare boards alongside the bilgewater” [Jupp. trag. 48]). Largerfreighters had another deck above this that may have housed somepassengers. In general, however, travelers in Paul’s day (likeall travelers up until modern times) camped above deck (some withtents). Only the very wealthy rented cabins (P.Zen. 10). Shipwrecksand pirates were not the only dangers. A man cautioned his wife,“When you come, bring your gold ornaments, but do not wear themon the boat” (P.Mich. 3.214 [see also 8.468]). Then as now,tossing someone overboard left a clean crime scene (Jon. 1:15; cf.Acts 20:3).
Summary
Mostbiblical characters, like their peers, rarely traveled far from home.It is commonly estimated that Jesus’ ministry encompassed adistance no greater than one hundred miles from his home. Hisapostles, though, took advantage of the travel benefits of the RomanEmpire. Paul was a far more experienced traveler than most, both byland and sea (Acts 27:9–10, 30–32), although he appearsto have pushed the limits of safety on occasion. He mentions“sleepless nights and hunger” (2Cor. 6:5) as wellas being “in danger from rivers” and bandits (2Cor.11:26). In addition to what is reported in Acts 27, Paul wasshipwrecked at least three other times (2Cor. 11:25). Whetherby land or sea, travel in ancient times was not for the fainthearted.
Secondary Matches
The following suggestions occured because
Luke 24:13-35
is mentioned in the definition.
(1) Thefather of the disciple James, who is always identified as “theson of Alphaeus” in order to distinguish him from James the sonof Zebedee (Matt. 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13). (2) Thefather of Levi the tax collector (Mark 2:14). Some have suggestedthat this individual is also the father of James the disciple, butthis is unlikely. Additionally, some have identified Cle(o)pas (Luke24:18; John 19:25) with one of the Alphaeus persons, but this isdoubtful.
Hermeneutics is the science and practice of interpretation. It can refer more generally to the philosophy of human understanding, or more specifically to the tools and methods used for interpreting communicative acts.
Human communication takes place in a variety of ways: through the use of nonverbal signs, through speech, and through writing. Effective communication requires some degree of shared belief, knowledge, and background between the participants. If the communicators have a significant amount of common ground, they will be able to successfully understand one another with little extra effort. Conversely, individuals with vastly different backgrounds will need to take extra steps to communicate effectively, such as defining special terms, avoiding jargon and colloquialisms, appreciating details about the other’s cultural assumptions, or learning a foreign language.
The Bible is not exempt from this process of communication. The Scriptures are meant to be read, understood, and put into practice (Luke 8:4–15; James 1:18), a task that requires effort and study on the part of its readers (Acts 17:11; 2 Tim. 2:15). Everyone who reads the Bible is involved in this interpretative process, though readers will vary in their hermeneutical self-consciousness and skill. Thus, although readers are able to understand and appropriate much of the Bible without any special training in hermeneutical principles, such training is appropriate and helpful, both in attaining self-consciousness in interpretation and in acquiring new skills and insights in the effort to become a better reader.
The Development of Hermeneutics
The church has benefited from a long history of thinking about the nature and purpose of interpreting its Scriptures, and that reflection has resulted in a wide variety of hermeneutical theories and practices. How does one determine the meaning of a text? Is meaning the truth embedded within the passage? Or is it the original author’s intention in writing? Or does the text act independently of its author and history, either because it stands on its own terms or because it only “means” anything in interaction with readers? The answers to these questions will determine how readers approach a text, the questions they expect that text to answer, and the tools they use in interpretation.
From the early church to the Enlightenment. The early church emphasized the ability of the biblical text to convey heavenly truth, whether that truth was conceived as doctrinal teaching or absolute ethical rules. While the “literal meaning” of many texts could often supply simple truths and maxims, such a reading was at other times inadequate and could appear incompatible with what were considered basic and fundamental beliefs. Various allegorical techniques were therefore employed to explain such problematic texts. Interpreters often viewed the literal and historical features of the text as a starting point in the search for fuller meaning, as symbolic pointers to moral principles, absolute truths, or eternal realities. These practices were systematized throughout the Middle Ages and resulted in an extensive development of tradition. Church tradition, in turn, provided a degree of protection from the potential for arbitrariness in allegorical techniques, insisting that interpretation must be guided by the “rule of faith,” the traditional teaching and faith of the church.
Beginning in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, scholarship moved to distance itself from such tradition. The Protestant Reformers, dissatisfied with the rule of church tradition, sought to displace its authority with the direct rule of Scripture. They therefore returned to the original biblical text, engaging in critical study of the text itself and translating the Bible into the vernacular to make it more widely accessible. In the centuries that followed, Enlightenment scholars went a step further in their rejection of the church as the sole repository of knowledge. Instead, they asserted, knowledge was acquired through scientific inquiry and critical study. Such inquiry could be applied to any field: the forces of nature, human anatomy, or the interpretation of texts. The meaning of a text was not some abstract truth or heavenly principle; rather, meaning was determined by the human author’s original intention in writing and was therefore a historical matter. The intention of an author could be better exposed and understood through a more complete study of both the language in which a text was written and the historical circumstances that surrounded it. Many of these same emphases had been championed by the Protestant Reformers; yet the Enlightenment thinkers differed on one key point: the Reformers never questioned that the text was the word of God.
From the Enlightenment to the present. This favorable attitude toward historical research dwindled over the centuries. In its place authors emphasized the primacy of the text as text, apart from any connection to its origin and history. Literature, it is argued, ultimately operates independently from its author’s intention. All that matters is the text, and it is the reader’s job to understand the text on its own terms, apart from the contingencies surrounding its creation. To that end, interpreters should pay careful attention to the text’s literary features, including its plot structure, characterization, themes, and use of imagery. An interesting example of this hermeneutical dynamic is found in John 19:22, where Pilate asserts, “What I have written, I have written.” Pilate’s words quickly take on significance far beyond their author’s intention, primarily because they are juxtaposed with other themes in John, such as testimony and the kingship of Christ.
More recent approaches have emphasized the role of the reader in the construction of meaning. Interpretation, it is argued, is determined by the interaction between reader and text; readers bring their own presuppositions to the task of interpretation, and such assumptions determine meaning. The author and the historical context of the text will exert some influence, but the primary determinant of meaning is the present reader in his or her present environment. This is not to say that the text “means” whatever a reader wants it to mean; rather, it makes meaning contingent upon the contemporary environment and not subject to anything external to individual readers. On the one hand, readers must“actualize” the text by applying and appropriating it within an environment alien to the original. On the other, readers have the right, and in some cases the responsibility, of undermining the text, particularly if that text assists in the oppression of others.
Elements of an Effective Hermeneutic
An effective hermeneutic requires keeping each of these elements in constant balance with one another. God’s word is truthful and fully trustworthy, yet it is given to his people through individual human authors, authors who wrote in a particular context to a particular audience at a particular time. Understanding the Bible therefore requires knowledge of the purposes of these authors in their specific historical contexts. Nevertheless, our primary access to authorial intention is through the biblical text itself. Finally, understanding always requires personal interaction with, and application of, the text of Scripture to each person’s own life and circumstances. Thus, hermeneutics involves the simultaneous interaction of a variety of perspectives—truth, author, text, and reader—each of which cannot function properly without the others. What follows here is an outline of the most important hermeneutical tools required for such a weighty endeavor.
Linguistics
An appreciation of the nature, structure, and function of language is fundamental to any interpretative endeavor. Obviously, this applies first of all to the specific languages in which the books of the Bible were originally composed. Each language has its own unique vocabulary, grammar, and syntax, and structures available to a writer in one language often are absent in another. Thus, while it is often necessary and acceptable to rely on translations (Neh. 7:73–8:12), readers should be aware that translation itself involves a degree of unavoidable interpretation.
A more general analysis of language is also useful. Understanding the typical patterns by which authors will string sentences together is necessary for following a writing’s train of thought. This tool, called “discourse analysis,” operates above the sentence level, attempting to understand and explain how sentences function in conjunction with one another in order to produce meaningful paragraphs, and how those paragraphs in turn operate within the overarching purpose of the discourse. These patterns of discourse can vary on the basis of book, author, language, culture, and literary genre, but there are also features of effective discourse common to all communication. Thus, while the principles and rules of communication are often intuitively grasped, understanding language, both generally and specifically, is foundational to the task of interpretation.
Literature and Literary Theory
The biblical writers are concerned not only with the informational content of their writing, but also with the manner in which that content is communicated. The words, patterns of speech, style, and imagery of any text provide significant insight into its purpose and message, apart from that text’s specific propositional content. The diversity of language used in the Gospels provides an example of this. Each of the four Gospel authors has a slightly different concern in his writing. John’s purpose, “that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31), explains his frequent use of courtroom language, such as “testimony” and “witness” (e.g., John 21:24). Mark, by contrast, sweeps the reader along a fast-paced and intensely personal exposition of Jesus’ life and death through the terseness and immediacy of his narration. Attention to these literary details allows the reader to more fully participate in the world of the text.
Such decisions will often depend upon a thorough analysis of genre. A reader naturally interprets historical narrative differently from poetry and didactic material. Furthermore, the conventions of different genres change over time. The book of Acts, for example, despite its essentially historical character, does not appear concerned with recording an exact dictation of the many speeches it reports, despite modern expectations that historical writing should be as precise as possible. The classification of ancient genres and the description of their respective conventions therefore require a good deal of analysis and sensitivity, but often such insights are provided by a careful and open reading of the text.
History
As the product of a particular author at a particular time, each book of the Bible is situated within its own unique historical context. Paul, for example, while perhaps conscious of the importance of his letters for posterity, wrote to specific churches or individuals with a singular purpose. This particularity of author, audience, and circumstance can often cause interpretative problems. Thus, while background studies are not always necessary to get the general idea of the author’s message, they can be invaluable in protecting readers from anachronism and enabling them to better appreciate the author’s purpose and perspective.
Historical study is assisted by specialized disciplines. Archaeology, for example, focuses on the beliefs, habits, practices, and history of ancient cultures, harnessing a wealth of evidence to that end. Similarly, anthropology and other social sciences are able to explore facets of modern cultures in order to better assess cross-cultural presuppositions and behaviors, many of which provide insight into ancient civilizations that shared similar attitudes. These methods provide the reader with the information necessary to understand a text in terms consistent with its cultural backdrop, highlighting both the similarities and the differences between the Bible and its environment. Recent discoveries of ancient Hittite treaties, for example, shed light on the “cutting ceremony” recorded in Gen. 15. These treaties detail similar ceremonies in which the vassal of a king would walk between hewed animal carcasses as a symbol of allegiance; if disobedience occurred, the vassal would share the fate of the animals. A similar ceremony occurs in Genesis, but with an interesting twist at the end: God, not Abram, passes through the pieces (15:17).
Humility and the Attitude of the Reader
Careful attention in interpretation requires a great deal of humility. It is difficult to overstate the importance of the attitude of the reader for an effective hermeneutic. Being a good reader requires willingness to share and participate in the world of the author and the text, a willingness that postpones judgment and expects personal change. This, in turn, requires a spirit of self-criticism, a commitment to defer one’s own presuppositions in favor of those of the text. Although readers are never able to fully distance themselves from their cultural situation and assumptions, the study of hermeneutics, among other things, can provide tools and skills for self-criticism and self-awareness, skills that enable the reader to better understand, appreciate, and appropriate the meaning of a text. Even a peripheral understanding of the complexities of interpretation can help readers develop an attitude of humility, imagination, and expectation as they approach the Scriptures.
Such humility is a prerequisite for application. The depth of meaning embedded in any text, and especially within the Bible, provides the humble reader with a rich and powerful tool for personal growth. Having better understood the world of the text on its own terms, readers are able to “project” that world onto themselves and their environment, to appropriate its meaning in a new and possibly foreign context. Thus, Jesus promises that those who hear, understand, and put his word into practice will yield a crop “some thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times what was sown” (Mark 4:20).
Unique Features of Biblical Interpretation
Certain unique features of the biblical text can create special opportunities and challenges for the Christian interpreter. These challenges are at work in the Bible’s own interpretation of itself. The Bible was written by many different authors over the course of a long period of history; it is therefore not surprising to find later authors reflecting on earlier periods. This innerbiblical interpretation offers the Christian insights into the unique nature of biblical hermeneutics and therefore provides a foundational model in approaching the Bible as the word of God.
The common and preeminent assumption that grounds innerbiblical interpretation is the commitment to ultimate divine authorship. Thus, the writer of Hebrews, though affirming the diversity of human authorship in the Bible (1:1), regularly introduces OT quotations with statements such as “God says” (1:5), “he spoke through David” (4:7), and “the Holy Spirit says” (3:7). Other writers tend to prefer the formula “it is written,” but each of these reflects a common presupposition that the Scriptures are ultimately delivered by God (2 Pet. 1:21).
Divine authorship means, at the very least, that there is a depth of meaning and purpose to the text, a depth often hidden even from the human author (1 Pet. 1:10–12). Psalm 2, for example, probably originally served as a coronation hymn used to celebrate the appointment of a new king in Israel. Yet the NT understands this psalm as a prophecy fulfilled in the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:33; Heb. 5:5). The intention of the original speaker can even be at odds with God’s intention, such as when Caiaphas claims, “It is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish” (John 11:50; cf. Acts 5:35–39). In this case, the irony of Caiaphas’s statement creates a powerful testimony, contrary to his intent, and is used by John to promote confidence in Jesus.
Furthermore, because the Scriptures are from God, they have a consistent and central focus. The NT unhesitatingly views all of Scripture, in all its diversity, as focused, by virtue of divine inspiration, on the person and work of Jesus Christ. This is seen in, for example, Luke 24:13–35, where the resurrected Jesus, “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” explains to his disciples “what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself” (cf. John 5:39; 12:41). This central focus on Christ requires the Christian interpreter to understand any individual verse in light of its context within the canon, to operate with the same assumption as the NT apostles, that all the Scriptures are concerned with testifying to Jesus the Christ.
Additionally, Paul views both Testaments as the special possession and once-for-all foundation of God’s church (Eph. 2:19–20; cf. Acts 2:42). The church, from a NT perspective, is the primary audience of the entirety of Scripture (1 Pet. 1:12) and is therefore uniquely entrusted with understanding and proclaiming its message (Matt. 28:18–20). While the Scriptures themselves are the only infallible guide for interpretation, believers should not forsake the teaching and tradition of the church (2 Thess. 2:15).
Finally, full understanding of the Bible requires the work of the Holy Spirit in conjunction with the faith of the reader. Belief and understanding go together (John 10:38), and both are the result of the unique work of the Holy Spirit (16:13). The proof that such understanding has taken place is the godly life of the believer (Rom. 2:13; James 1:22–25). The reverse is also true: disobedience works against understanding the riches of God’s Word (James 1:21). Such considerations underline the importance of the hermeneutical task. The tools and principles of hermeneutics are valuable only insofar as they enable the reader to better understand and appropriate the biblical message, to hear the word of God and respond appropriately.
The first of the Major Prophets in the canon, the book of Isaiah is one of the longest books in the Bible. This, coupled with the NT’s frequent use of Isaiah, has contributed to the book’s great importance in Christian tradition. Isaiah contains some of the most memorable passages in Scripture, with its majestic poetry and evocative sermons making it a literary masterpiece. Nevertheless, it has also been characterized as a difficult book to comprehend and make sense of as a whole because the connections between different paragraphs and sections appear to be haphazard at times and are difficult to understand. However, some knowledge of the way the book was formed can aid in interpretation.
Authorship
The authorship of Isaiah has been one of the most debated issues in biblical interpretation. Ancient tradition credited the eighth-century BC prophet Isaiah with the entire sixty-six chapters. However, an early Jewish tradition in the Talmud claims that “the men of Hezekiah” compiled Isaiah, showing their awareness that the book did not come entirely from Isaiah.
Literary evidence. Isaiah son of Amoz is referred to as author in three sections of the book (1:1; 2:1; 13:1) and is featured in both third-person (chaps. 7; 20; 36–39) and first-person (chaps. 6; 8) narratives. However, chapters 40–66 have no such headings and do not even mention Isaiah. While references to Isaiah as author in specific sections may suggest that he actually did write the whole book, they may also indicate that he did not write sections that are not ascribed to him. Similarly, historical narratives referring to the prophet in the third person may suggest that someone else wrote them, although the intimate information in them (e.g., 7:3) could point to Isaianic authorship.
Another possible indication of multiple authorship is the marked difference in literary style and vocabulary found in different sections of Isaiah. While such judgments are quite subjective, both sides of the authorship debate acknowledge these stylistic differences.
Historical settings. The debate regarding the authorship of Isaiah really centers on the diverse historical settings within different sections of the book. Chapters 1–39 clearly are set during the late eighth century BC, the period when Assyria is threatening Judah. Assyria is frequently mentioned (e.g., 7:17; 8:4; 10:12; 11:11; 19:23; 20:1; 27:13; 36:1), as are Judean kings (e.g., 1:1; 6:1; 7:1; 14:28; 36:1) and the prophet Isaiah himself (e.g., 1:1; 2:1; 13:1; 20:2; 37:5).
In contrast, the historical setting of chapters 40–55 is not eighth-century BC Judah. Israel is described as in captivity and Jerusalem is referred to as ruined and deserted (44:26, 28; 52:9); there is frequent allusion to the sufferings of the exile (42:22, 25; 43:28; 47:6; 51:17; 52:5); and the coming return from exile is described as close at hand (40:2; 46:13; 48:20). Furthermore, in chapters 40–55 Babylon is Israel’s enemy, even though in Isaiah’s day they were allies. Also, Cyrus the Great, the Persian king who conquered Babylon in 539 BC (ending the exile), is mentioned with no introduction or explanation (44:28; 45:1), even though he lived 150 years after Isaiah. In sum, chapters 40–55 appear to be addressed to Judeans in Babylonian exile.
Conversely, chapters 56–66 appear to come from yet another historical period. Unlike in chapters 40–55, where the temple was destroyed and out of operation, in chapters 56–66 the temple (66:6), along with sacrifices (56:7; 66:3), offerings (57:6; 65:3; 66:3), and Sabbaths (56:2; 58:13; 66:23), is referred to. Also, Jerusalem and its walls are standing (62:6), unlike in chapters 40–55, where it is predicted that Jerusalem will be rebuilt (44:26). This seems to indicate that it addresses those who have returned to Jerusalem after the exile.
This evidence suggests that the book of Isaiah was written by several authors from different time periods. Alternatively, these diverse historical settings could be explained by supposing that Isaiah spoke to audiences in the distant future through divine inspiration. While skeptical scholars holding antisupernatural worldviews have denied this possibility, those who believe in an almighty God believe that he can reveal the distant future to his prophets. However, the question is whether that is in fact the case with Isaiah. It is significant that in chapters 40–55 Babylonian oppression is not predicted as something to come in the future but rather is presupposed as the present conditions under which the writer is living—only the release from exile is predicted. Logically, it would seem that the author lived in the situation that he presupposes and before the situation that he predicts.
Arguments for the unity of Isaiah. Some scholars still hold to the unity of Isaiah on the following grounds: (1)no ancient manuscripts show that the book ever existed in another form; (2)differences in style and vocabulary can be explained by different subject matter (besides which, the title “Holy One of Israel” unites all sections of Isaiah, as it is used thirteen times in chapters 1–39, sixteen times in chapters 40–66, and only seven times in the rest of the Bible); (3)it seems unlikely that an author as great as the one who wrote chapters 40–55 should remain anonymous; and (4)although it is logical to assume that a prophet is contemporary with what he presupposes, once a prophet makes a prediction, that prediction can become a presupposition for another prediction. Therefore, Isaiah’s prediction of exile in 39:6–7 could become the basis or presupposition on which he continued to prophesy the end to the exile.
However, these arguments are not compelling. Although no manuscripts attest to earlier versions of the book, we possess so few manuscripts from before the time of Christ (and none dating to the time during which the three sections of Isaiah are thought to have been combined) that this is insignificant. Also, the differences in subject matter do not seem great enough to explain the very different style and language in the various sections. Regarding the unlikelihood that the writer of chapters 40–55 could remain anonymous, the fact is that many biblical books are indeed anonymous (e.g., Judges, 1–2Kings, 1–2Chronicles). However, most significant are the different historical settings of the major sections of Isaiah. If Isaiah was addressing an audience in the distant future, not only would it be a situation unparalleled in the biblical prophets, but also the message would have been largely unintelligible to Isaiah’s contemporaries (especially references to Cyrus). Moreover, the text does not claim to predict these situations but only presupposes them. However, the reality of prophetic inspiration is underscored, as a later author predicts not only the end of the exile but also a suffering messiah.
First, Second, and Third Isaiah. For convenience (and not to imply that each author was named “Isaiah”), the three major sections are often referred to as First Isaiah (chaps. 1–39), Second Isaiah (chaps. 40–55), and Third Isaiah (chaps. 56–66). In light of the purposeful connections between the different sections, it is probable that the book was the product of a “school” of Isaiah’s disciples (cf. 8:16) who collected and organized Isaiah’s words and added to them over a long period of time.
In the end, the involvement of multiple authors in the composition of Isaiah does not undermine its authority as Scripture. Its authority derives not from the namesake prophet but rather from God, who inspired its writing (2Tim. 3:16).
Plan of the Book
Isaiah has a literary structure similar to that of Ezekiel, Zephaniah, Joel, and the Greek translation of Jeremiah. The first section is concerned with judgment on Israel (chaps. 1–12), the second with judgment on foreign nations (chaps. 13–23), and the third records prophecies of hope and salvation (chaps. 24–27). This structure purposefully places hopeful oracles of comfort after the judgment oracles. Some view the entire book of Isaiah as following this pattern (chaps. 1–12, judgment on Israel; chaps. 13–35, judgment on other nations; chaps. 40–66, oracles of comfort). However, both of these schemes are somewhat forced, since each section is slightly mixed (there are oracles of salvation in chaps. 1–12, prophecies against Judah in chaps. 13–23, and judgment oracles in chaps. 56–66). However, in broad outline it is helpful to recognize this structure.
Outline
I. Judgment on Judah (1–12)
II. Judgment on the Nations (13–27)
III. Warnings to Trust in the Lord (28–35)
IV. The Assyrian Crisis (36–39)
V. The Second Exodus (40–48)
VI. The Restoration of Jerusalem (49–55)
VII. The Earthly and New Jerusalem (56–66)
First Isaiah (Isa. 1–39)
Key historical events. This section of Isaiah comes from the period when the nation of Assyria was aggressively expanding its territory and terrorizing weaker nations, such as Israel and Judah. Two key historical events form the background for many oracles in chapters 1–39 and are the prominent focus there: the Syro-Ephraimite war of 734 BC and the 701 BC Assyrian invasion of Judah.
The Syro-Ephraimite war. The nations of Aram (Syria) and Israel (Ephraim) allied together against Assyria and tried to coerce Judah into joining them. They planned to replace King Ahaz with a king of their choice (7:6), which would end the Davidic dynasty. In the end, Ahaz rejected Isaiah’s advice to simply trust God (7:9) and instead appealed to the king of Assyria for aid. The Assyrians conquered Aram (732 BC) and Israel (722 BC) and assimilated them into the Assyrian empire. Judah survived but had to pay tribute to Assyria from that point onward.
The Assyrian invasion of Judah. The Assyrian king Sennacherib invaded Judah when Hezekiah, Ahaz’s son, reigned in Jerusalem. The invasion devastated Judah; however, when Jerusalem was threatened, Hezekiah, in contrast to his father, trusted God to save them, and the Assyrian army suffered massive losses and failed to take Jerusalem (37:36).
Structure and themes. The structure of chapters 1–39 is quite complex. However, the prophecies and historical narratives concerned with Isaiah’s day are roughly in chronological order (e.g., prophecies and events occurring during the reign of King Ahaz [6:1–8:22] precede those during Hezekiah’s reign [36:1–39:8]). The structure of these chapters alternates between threat and promise (e.g., chap. 1= threat; 2:1–4= promise of hope; 2:5–4:1= threat; 4:2–6= promise of hope). Analogously, the main themes of these chapters alternate between threat and promise.
Holiness. A major theme of Isaiah is God’s holiness, as evidenced in its favorite title for the Lord, “Holy One of Israel.” While the original idea underlying holiness was physical separation and did not have an ethical dimension (e.g., temple prostitutes in the ancient Near East were called “holy women”), a different concept of holiness emerges in chapter 6, the account of Isaiah’s call. Since 6:1–9:7 is the only part in the book with autobiographical narration, these chapters probably come from an original memoir of Isaiah himself. The memoir is surrounded by judgment oracles with a repeated element, “Yet for all this, his anger is not turned away, his hand is still upraised” (5:25; 9:12, 17, 21; 10:4), suggesting that the memoir as a whole was inserted between these oracles to explain God’s anger recorded in 1–12. God’s mandate to Israel was to “be holy, because I am holy” (Lev. 11:44–45), but Israel failed to follow this command. In the presence of the holy God, Isaiah realized his own sinfulness and the sinfulness of his people (6:5), connecting the concepts of holiness and righteousness.
The remnant. Already in the first chapter we see the emergence of two groups within Israel: the wicked, who will be punished, and a remnant, who will be redeemed (1:27–31). This focus on the remnant was one way in which Isaiah saw hope for Israel despite the coming judgment that he predicted. The remnant theme highlights the apparent tension between God as holy and God as redeemer: God’s holiness is upheld through the judgment on Israel, but God’s character as savior is witnessed through the remnant that is redeemed.
A coming messianic king. The section 6:1–9:7 dates from the time of the Syro-Ephraimite war, and it appears that Isaiah wrote it down (8:16) when Ahaz refused his counsel. The memoir emphasizes the rejection of the Davidic king Ahaz and predicts the birth of a royal son who would replace Ahaz and bring freedom from oppression (9:1–7). This dissatisfaction with the reigning Davidic king was the seedbed for messianic expectations and is the background for the messianic trilogy of 7:14–16; 9:2–7; 11:1–9. While some of these passages may have originally referred to Hezekiah, he falls short of these messianic expectations, leaving the community of faith awaiting another anointed one (messiah). Ominously, chapter 39 describes Hezekiah’s entertaining guests from Babylon, perhaps implying an alliance between the two nations. Hezekiah’s actions prompt Isaiah to predict the Babylonian exile (39:6–7), providing a fitting segue to chapters 40–66.
Second Isaiah (Isa. 40–55)
A message to the exiles. Second Isaiah was written near the end of the exilic period for those who were deported by Nebuchadnezzar to Babylon. Although the exiles in Babylon were settled in communities (Ezek. 3:15) and allowed to build houses and farm the land (Jer. 29:5–7), they had no temple for worship, and many of the exiles probably saw the destruction of Jerusalem and their temple as the end of God’s action on their behalf. The gods of Babylon appeared to have won the victory. The exiles’ faith was flagging, and even those who did not abandon worship of Israel’s God simply clung to the past and expected nothing new from him.
Contrary to these expectations, Second Isaiah proclaims that God is doing something new for his people and bringing an end to the exile (40:1; 55:12). The role of Cyrus in this deliverance is highlighted, with explicit and implicit reference made to the Persian king (41:2–3, 25; 44:28; 45:1–4, 13–14). However, amid the oracles of comfort there is also a challenge to Israel, which is somehow resistant to the message. To break down this resistance, the prophecy has a sustained rhetoric against idol worship, with some quite hilarious sections ridiculing idol makers (44:9–20). Israel needed to realize that only Yahweh is God and to trust that he will redeem Israel for his purposes. Chapters 1–39 allude to the redemption of Israel (1:27; 35:9), and chapters 40–66 reveal more of how this redemption will take place: the work of “the servant.”
The servant. Several poems featuring an anonymous “servant” (42:1–9; 49:1–12; 50:4–11; 52:13–53:12) are often referred to as the Servant Songs. As far back as the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:34), interpreters have struggled with how to identify “the servant.” At times, Israel is explicitly identified as the servant (Isa. 41:8–9; 42:19 [2×]; 43:10), yet the servant clearly also has individual features, suggesting that a person was to fill the role. Some have suggested Cyrus because 42:1 says that the servant “will bring justice to the nations,” and Cyrus is described as conquering nations (41:2, 25; 45:1). However, despite all the talk of Cyrus, the text never explicitly applies the term “servant” to him, which can hardly be by chance. Alternatively, the servant could be the prophet who speaks in these chapters (as the Ethiopian eunuch speculated), since he was destined for his mission before his birth (49:1) and equipped for a mission involving prophetic speech (49:2) and had received divinely revealed knowledge (50:4).
Yet the Servant Songs are also messianic and look forward to a future anointed one who will fulfill the role of the servant fully. In the NT, Jesus is presented as the new Israel (cf. Matt. 2:15 with Hos. 11:1) who truly fulfills the role of the servant (John 12:38, quoting Isa. 53:1; Matt. 8:17, quoting Isa. 53:4). However, Paul appears to hold to a collective interpretation of the songs, as he sees himself as the servant in some instances (Acts 13:47; Rom. 15:21; Gal. 1:15). Both the individual and the collective interpretations are legitimated in the NT, as both Jesus (individual) and the church (collective), which is Christ’s body, fulfill the role of the servant.
Third Isaiah (Isa. 56–66)
In 539 BC Cyrus allowed the exiles to return home to rebuild Jerusalem and its temple (Ezra 1:1–4). Despite many obstacles, the temple was finished in 515 BC. Even with this success, living in the land was challenging (see Malachi), with factions among the people, economic troubles, hypocritical worship (Isa. 58:1–14), and problems with corrupt leaders (56:9–57:13). It was for this postexilic community that Third Isaiah was written (probably before the reforms of Ezra and Nehemiah in 445 BC brought lasting change to the desperate situation).
Unlike in chapters 40–55, where Israel needs to be roused from its despair by the imminent actions of God, in chapters 56–66 the people are pleading with God to help them (59:11; 62:7). In chapter 59 the prophet declares that God’s delay in helping his people is due not to his inability but rather to the sins of the people, which are described, confessed, and lamented.
In many ways, Third Isaiah unites the themes of First Isaiah and Second Isaiah. Second Isaiah emphasizes the inbreaking of a new age that contrasts with the old. The former things are remembered, but the new thing that God was doing—the return from exile—is stressed. However, in Third Isaiah the deliverance from Babylon is seen as merely a foretaste of God’s promise, which is now identified as a new heaven and earth (chaps. 65–66). Third Isaiah looks forward to the new things that are still ahead.
First Isaiah predicts a Davidic messiah who would rule in righteousness (9:1–7; 11:1–9) and a faithful remnant that would respond in trust (10:20; 28:16). Second Isaiah does not continue with these themes, instead turning attention to the “servant” whose suffering and death would atone for Israel (53:4–5). However, Third Isaiah links First Isaiah’s faithful remnant with obedient “servants” who take on the mission of the Suffering Servant in Second Isaiah. This interpretation sets the direction for the NT’s identification of the royal messiah of chapters 1–39 as the servant of chapters 40–55 (Luke 24:26; Acts 8:32). Third Isaiah thus unites and reinterprets the book as a whole.
It is fitting that Jesus read the opening verses of Isa. 61 in the synagogue at the beginning of his ministry. Like Third Isaiah, he united prophecies of both the messianic Davidic ruler of First Isaiah and the Suffering Servant of Second Isaiah, taking on both roles himself. Third Isaiah ends with a glorious future pictured for the Jewish community as they function as priests in the world (61:6). Similarly, Christ’s body, the church, now functions in these same roles in the world (cf. Acts 13:47; Rev. 5:10).
A collection of 150 poems. They are the hymnbook of the OTperiod, used in public worship. Psalms contains songs of differentlengths, types, and dates. The earliest psalm (Ps. 90) is attributedto Moses (mid-second millennium BC), while the content of Ps. 126 andPs. 137 points to the latest periods of the OT (mid-first millenniumBC). They continue to be used as a source of public worship andprivate devotion.
HistoricalBackground
Mostpsalms have a title. In the Hebrew text this title comprises thefirst verse, whereas English translations set it off before the firstverse. Titles vary. Many name an author (e.g., David [Ps. 3]; Asaph[Ps. 77]; sons of Korah [Ps. 42]), while others provide informationabout genre (e.g., Psalms of Ascent [Pss. 120–134]), tune(e.g., “Do Not Destroy” [Ps. 75]), use in worship (Ps.92), and a circumstance that led to composition (Ps. 51). Informationin the title gives hints concerning how psalms were written andbrought into a final collection.
Composition
Asmentioned, the titles of the psalms often give indications ofauthorship and occasionally name the circumstance that led to thewriting of the psalm. A good example is Ps. 51, where the titlestates, “For the director of music. A psalm of David. When theprophet Nathan came to him after David had committed adultery withBathsheba.” The title connects the psalm with the eventsrecorded in 2Sam. 11–12 and suggests that David wrote thesong in response to his sin and Nathan’s confrontation.
Althoughonly a handful of the psalms have such a historical title, it islikely that most psalms were composed in response to some specificcircumstance that encouraged the author to write. Interestingly,though, the psalmists do not speak about the specific circumstance inthe psalm itself. Psalm 51, for instance, fits perfectly with thesituation that the title describes in that it expresses guilt towardGod and asks for forgiveness, but nowhere does it speak specificallyabout adultery. The psalmists do this intentionally because they arewriting the song not as a memorial to an event, but rather as aprayer that others who have had similar though not identicalexperiences can use after them. Thus, Ps. 51 has been used as a modelprayer for many penitents, whether they have sinned like David or inanother way.
Mostmodern hymns have a similar background. John Newton, for instance,was inspired to write “Amazing Grace” because of awe thathe felt at his conversion to Christianity from the evil of being aslave trader. However, when he wrote it, he wanted others to sing itas reflecting not on his conversion but on their own.
Collection
Thepsalms were composed over a thousand-year period. Thus, it appearsthat the book of Psalms was a growing collection until it came to aclose at an unknown time between the writing of the two Testaments.
In1Chron. 16:7–36 we may get a glimpse of how the processworked. The text describes David turning a musical composition overto the Levitical musician Asaph and his associates. It is likely thatthe priests kept an official copy of the book of Psalms in the holyplace (the temple while it stood). The psalms, after all, were thehymns of ancient Israel. Their primary function was as a corporatebook of prayer, though certainly they could be used in privatedevotions (note Hannah’s prayer in 1Sam. 2:1–10 andits relationship to Ps. 113).
Organizationand Structure
Thepsalms have no obvious organization that explains the location of allthe psalms. They are not organized in terms of genre, authorship,time of composition, or length. There is only one statement aboutorganization, found in Ps. 72:20: “This concludes the prayersof David son of Jesse.” In the light of this comment, it issurprising that a number of Davidic psalms appear in subsequentsections (Pss. 101; 103; 108–110; 122; 124; 131; 133; 138–145).The best explanation is that at one point Ps. 72 concluded theDavidic psalms, but there was a reorganization before the canonicalorder was permanently closed.
Anumber of contemporary theories try to find some deep structure tothe book, but it is best to refrain from speculation in regard to theoverall structure. Nonetheless, a few structural characteristics areobvious. First, the division of Psalms into five books seems toreflect the fivefold division of the Pentateuch:
I.Book 1 (Pss. 1–41)
II.Book 2 (Pss. 42–72)
III.Book 3 (Pss. 73–89)
IV.Book 4 (Pss. 90–106)
V.Book 5 (Pss. 107–150)
Eachbook ends with a doxology. Such an intentional association with thePentateuch would lend support to the Psalter’s claim toauthority. Although these are prayers to God, they are also God’sword.
Second,within the Psalter there are subcollections. That is, there arepsalms that came into the book not individually but as a group. Thebest-known such group are the Psalms of Ascent (Pss. 120–134),probably so named because worshipers sang them while going up(ascending) to the Temple Mount during one of the annual religiousfestivals in Jerusalem.
Third,it appears that psalms are intentionally placed at the beginning andat the end of the book to serve as an introduction and a conclusion.Psalms 1–2 serve as an introduction that alerts the reader tothe twin important themes of law and messiah. Psalm 1 pronounces ablessing on those who love God’s law. The psalms, after all,are an intimate and personal conversation with God. One must be onthe side of the godly to enter such a holy textual space, just as onemust be godly to enter the precincts of the temple. After the readerenters, Psalm 2 provides an encounter with God and his anointed one(messiah). At the end of the book, the last five psalms (Pss.146–150) constitute a tremendous doxology of praise.
Thisleads to the final observation on structure. Psalms of lamentpredominate at the beginning of the book, but they give way to hymnsof praise toward the end. It is almost as if one enters the Psaltermourning and leaves it praising. Indeed, the Psalter brings thereader into contact with God and thus transforms the reader fromsadness to joy.
LiteraryConsiderations
Genre.The individual psalms may be identified as songs, prayers, or poems.Specifically, they are lyric poems (expressing the emotions of thepoet), often addressed to God, and set to musical accompaniment.Although the categories overlap, seven different types of psalms canbe recognized, with the first three being by far the most common.
• Lament.The largest single group of psalms are the laments, characterized bythe expression of unhappy emotions: sadness, disappointment, anger,worry. The lamenters call on God to save them, even while at timescomplaining about God’s actions toward them (Ps. 42:9–10).Some laments contain petitions for forgiveness (Ps. 51), while othersassert innocence of any wrongdoing (Ps. 26). A few laments evencontain curses directed toward the enemies who are trying to harm thepsalmist (Ps. 69:19–28). Most laments end by praising God orreaffirming confidence in God (Ps. 130:7–8). Usually the reasonfor the change from mourning to rejoicing is not given, but Ps. 77pinpoints the reason as the memory of God’s great salvationevents in the past (vv. 10, 16–20). One psalm, Ps. 88, lamentsbut never makes the turn, remaining in the pit of despair. Yet evenhere we have a glimmer of hope in that the one who laments is stillspeaking to God.
• Thanksgiving.When God answers a lament, the response is thanksgiving. Psalms ofthanksgiving are very similar to hymns (see below), but they cite anearlier problem that God has addressed. Psalm 30 praises God forrestoring the psalmist’s good fortune and health after hesuffered due to his earlier arrogance that led him to forget God (vv.6–7).
• Hymn.Hymns are psalms of unalloyed praise directed toward God. Thepsalmists often call for others to join their worship of God (Ps.100).
• Remembrance.While many psalms evoke memories of God’s actions in the past(as the lament in Ps. 77 recalls the exodus), certain psalms focus onrehearsing the actions of God in the past. Psalm 136 is one of themost memorable examples. As a liturgical psalm, it recites a divineaction (“[God] swept Pharaoh and his army into the Red Sea”[v.15]) followed by a congregational response (“His loveendures forever”).
• Confidence.These psalms are defined by their mood of quiet trust in God even inthe midst of trouble. They often present a reassuring image of God.The picture of God as a shepherd in Ps. 23 or as a mother in Ps. 131are good examples.
• Wisdom.Some psalms meditate on the law (Pss. 1; 119) or have interestssimilar to those of wisdom literature, such as Job, Proverbs, andEcclesiastes (Pss. 49; 73).
• Kingship.A number of psalms praise God as king (Ps. 47) or the human king ashis agent (Pss. 20–21) or both (Ps.2).
Style.The psalms are poems, and so their style is characterized by the useof parallelism and figurative language. Poetry is also notable forits short lines. A poet packs a lot of meaning into very few words.So it is important to slow down and reflect on a psalm in order toderive its maximum effect. Besides brevity of expression,parallelism, and figurative language, poets create interest by usingother literary tools. The psalmists use these poetic devices not onlyto inform their readers’ intellect but also to stimulate theirimagination and arouse their emotions. (See also Acrostic; Imagery;Poetry.)
TheologicalMessage
Althoughthe psalms are not theological essays, readers can learn about Godand their relationship with God from these poems. The book of Psalmsis a bit like a portrait gallery of God, using images to describe whohe is and the nature of our relationship with him. Some examplesinclude God as shepherd (Ps. 23), king (Ps. 47), warrior (Ps. 98),and mother (Ps. 131), and the list could be greatly expanded. Eachone of these picture images casts light on the nature of God and alsothe nature of our relationship with God. After all, theaforementioned psalms explicitly or implicitly describe God’speople as sheep, subjects, soldiers, and children.
Connectionto the New Testament and Today
Jesushimself draws attention to Psalms as a book that anticipated hiscoming suffering and glorification (Luke 24:25–27, 44). TheGospels recognized that Jesus’ zeal for God was well expressedby Ps. 69:9 (John 2:17). When at the apex of his suffering on thecross, Jesus uttered the words found in Ps. 22:1 (Matt. 27:46). TheNT writers also saw that Jesus was the fulfillment of the covenantthat promised that a son of David would have an everlasting throne(2Sam. 7:16). Accordingly, the royal psalms (e.g., Pss. 2; 110)often were applied to Jesus, who is the Messiah (the Christ, “theanointed one”).
Todaywe read Psalms not only as an ancient witness to the coming work ofChrist but also, as John Calvin put it, as a mirror of our souls. Thepsalms were written for worshipers who came after them with similarthough not identical joys and problems. The psalms should becomemodels of our prayers.
The biblical corpus known as the Pentateuch consists of thefirst five books of the OT: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, andDeuteronomy. The word “Pentateuch” comes from two Greekwords (penta [“five”] and teuchos [“scroll case,book”]) and is a designation attested in the early churchfathers. The collection is also commonly known as the “FiveBooks of Moses,” “the Law of Moses,” or simply the“Law,” reflecting the traditional Jewish name “Torah,”meaning “law” or “instruction.” The Torah isthe first of three major sections that comprise the Hebrew Bible(Torah, Nebiim, Ketubim [Law, Prophets, Writings]); thus for bothJewish and Christian traditions it represents the introduction to theBible as a whole as well as its interpretive foundation.
TheEnglish names for the books of the Pentateuch came from the LatinVulgate, based on the Greek Septuagint. These appellations are mainlydescriptive of their content. Genesis derives from “generations”or “origin,” Exodus means “going out,”Leviticus represents priestly (Levitical) service, Numbers refers tothe censuses taken in the book, and Deuteronomy indicates “secondlaw” because of Moses’ rehearsal of God’s commands(see Deut. 17:18). The Hebrew designations derive from opening wordsin each book. Bereshit (Genesis) means “in the beginning”;Shemot (Exodus), “[these are] the names”; Wayyiqra’(Leviticus), “and he called”; Bemidbar (Numbers), “inthe desert”; and Debarim (Deuteronomy), “[these are] thewords.”
Referringto the Pentateuch as “Torah” or the “Law”reflects the climactic reception of God’s commands at MountSinai, which were to govern Israel’s life and worship in thepromised land, including their journey to get there. However, callingthe Pentateuch the “Law” can be a bit misleading becausethere are relatively few passages that simply list a set of commands,and all law passages are set within a broad narrative. The Pentateuchis a grand story that begins on a universal scale with the creationof the cosmos and ends on the plains of Moab as the readeranticipates the fulfillment of God’s plan to redeem a fallenworld through his chosen people. The books offer distinct qualitiesand content, but they are also inherently dependent upon one another,as the narrative remains unbroken through the five volumes. Genesisends with Jacob’s family in Egypt, and, though many years havepassed, this is where Exodus begins. Leviticus outlines cultic lifeat the tabernacle (constructed at the end of Exodus) and even beginswithout a clear subject (“And he called...”),which requires the reader to supply “the Lord” from thelast verse of Exodus. Numbers begins with an account of Israel’sfighting men as the nation prepares to leave Sinai, and Deuteronomyis Moses’ farewell address to the nation on the cusp of thepromised land.
Authorshipand Composition
Althoughthe Pentateuch is technically an anonymous work, Jewish and Christiantradition attributes its authorship to Moses, the main figure of thestory from Exodus to Deuteronomy. The arguments for attributing theauthorship of the Pentateuch to Moses come from internal evidencewithin both Testaments. That Moses is responsible for at leastportions of the Pentateuch is suggested by references to his explicitliterary activity reflected within the narrative itself (Exod. 17:14;24:4; 34:28; Num. 33:2; Deut. 31:9, 22, 24), if not implied invarious literary formulas such as “the Lord said to Moses”(e.g., Exod. 39:1, 7, 21; Lev. 4:1; 11:1; 13:1; Num. 1:1; 2:1).Mosaic authorship receives support from the historical books, whichuse terms such as “the Book of the Law of Moses” invarious forms and references in the preexilic history (Josh. 8:30–35;23:6; 2Kings 14:6) as well as the postexilic history (e.g.,2Chron. 25:4; Ezra 6:18; Neh. 13:1). The same titles are usedby NT authors (e.g., Mark 12:26; Luke 24:44; John 1:45), evenreferring to the Pentateuch simply by the name “Moses” atvarious points (e.g., Luke 16:29; 24:27; 2Cor. 3:15).
Evenwith these examples, nowhere does the text explicitly state thatMoses is responsible for the entire compilation of the Pentateuch orthat he penned it with his own hand. Rather, a number of factorspoint to a later hand at work: Moses’ death and burial arereferenced (Deut. 34), the conquest of Canaan is referred to as past(Deut. 2:12), and there is evidence that the names of people andplaces were updated and explained for later generations (e.g., “Dan”in Gen. 14:14; cf. Josh. 19:47; Judg. 18:28b–29). Based onthese factors, it is reasonable to believe that the Pentateuchunderwent editorial alteration as it was preserved within Jewish lifeand took its final shape after Moses’ lifetime.
Overthe last century, the Documentary Hypothesis has dominated academicdiscussion of the Pentateuch’s composition. This theory wascrystallized by Julius Wellhausen in his Prolegomena to the Historyof Israel in the late nineteenth century and posits that thePentateuch originated from a variety of ancient sources derived fromdistinct authors and time periods that have been transmitted andjoined through a long and complex process. Traditionally thesedocuments are identified as J, E, D, and P. The J source is adocument authored by the “Yahwist” (German, Jahwist) inJudah around 840 BC and is so called because the name “Yahweh”is used frequently in its text. The E source stands for “Elohist”because of its preference for the divine title “Elohim”and was composed in Israel around 700 BC. The D source stands for“Deuteronomy” because it reflects material found in thatbook; it was composed sometime around Josiah’s reform in 621BC. The P document reflects material that priests would be concernedwith in the postexilic time period, approximately 500 BC. This theoryand its related forms stem from the scholarly concern over variousliterary characteristics such as the use of divine names; doubletsand duplications in the text; observable patterns of style,terminology, and themes; and alleged discrepancies in facts,descriptions, and geographic or historical perspective.
Variousdocumentary theories of composition have flourished over the lastcentury of pentateuchal scholarship and still have many adherents.However, lack of scholarly agreement about the dating and characterof the sources and the rise of other literary approaches to the texthave many conservative and liberal scholars calling into question theaccuracy and even interpretive benefit of the source theories.Moreover, if the literary observations used to create sourcedistinctions can be explained in other ways, then the DocumentaryHypothesis is significantly undermined.
Inits canonical form, the pentateuchal narrative combines artisticprose, poetry, and law to tell a dramatic history spanning thousandsof years. One could divide the story into six major sections:primeval history (Gen. 1–11), the patriarchs (Gen. 12–50),liberation from Egypt (Exod. 1–18), Sinai (Exod. 19:1–Num.10:10), wilderness journey (Num. 10:11–36:13), and Moses’farewell (Deuteronomy).
PrimevalHistory (Gen. 1–11)
Itis possible to divide Genesis into two parts based upon subjectmatter: the origin of creation and humankind’s call, fall, andpunishment (chaps 1–11), and the origin of a family that wouldbecome God’s conduit of salvation and blessing for the world(chaps. 12–50).
Theprimeval history comprises essentially the first eleven chapters ofGenesis, ending with the genealogy of Abraham in 11:26. Strictlyspeaking, 11:27 begins the patriarchal section with the sixthinstance of the toledot formula found in Genesis, referencingAbraham’s father, Terah. The Hebrew phrase ’elleh toledot(“these are the generations of”) occurs in eleven placesin Genesis and reflects a deliberate structural marker that one mayuse to divide the book into distinct episodes (2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1;11:10; 11:27; 25:12; 25:19; 36:1; 36:9; 37:2).
Genesisas we know it exhibits two distinct creation accounts in its firsttwo chapters. Although critical scholars contend that the differingaccounts reflect contradictory stories and different authors, it isjust as convenient to recognize that the two stories vary in styleand some content because they attempt to accomplish different aims.The first account, 1:1–2:3, is an artistic, poetic,symmetrical, and “heavenly” view of creation by atranscendent God, who spoke creation into being. In the secondaccount, 2:4–25, God is immanently involved with creation as heis present in a garden, breathes life into Adam’s nostrils,dialogues and problem-solves, fashions Eve from Adam’s side,and bestows warnings and commands. Both perspectives are foundationalfor providing an accurate view of God’s interaction withcreation in the rest of Scripture.
Asone progresses through chapters 1–11, the story quickly changesfrom what God has established as “very good” to discord,sin, and shame. Chapter 3 reflects the “fall” of humanityas Adam and Eve sin in eating from the forbidden tree in directdisobedience to God. The serpent shrewdly deceives the first couple,and thus all three incur God’s curses, which extend tounlimited generations. Sin that breaks the vertical relationshipbetween God and humanity intrinsically leads to horizontal strifebetween humans. Sin and disunity on the earth only intensify as onemoves from the murder story of Cain and Abel in chapter 4 to theflood in chapters 5–9. Violence, evil, and disorder have sopervaded the earth that God sends a deluge to wipe out all livingthings, save one righteous man and his family, along with an ark fullof animals. God makes the first covenant recorded in the biblicalnarrative with Noah (6:18), promising to save him from the flood ashe commands Noah to build an ark and gather food for survival. Noahfulfills all that God has commanded (6:22; 7:5), and God remembershis promise (8:1). This is the prototypical salvation story for therest of Scripture.
Chapter9 reflects a new start for humanity and all living things as thecreation mandate to “be fruitful and increase in number; fillthe earth and subdue it,” first introduced in 1:28, is restatedalong with the reminder that humankind is made in God’s image(1:27). Bearing the image involves new responsibilities andstipulations in the postdiluvian era (9:2–6). There will beenmity between humans and animals, animals are now appropriate food,and yet lifeblood will be specially revered. God still requiresaccountability for just and discriminate shedding of blood andorderly relationships, as he has proved in the deluge, but now herelinquishes this responsibility to humankind. In return, Godpromises never to destroy all flesh again, and he will set therainbow in the sky as a personal reminder. Like the covenant withNoah in 6:18, the postdiluvian covenant involves humankind fulfillingcommands (9:1–7) and God remembering his covenant (9:8–17),specially termed “everlasting” (9:16).
Theprimeval commentary on humankind’s unabating sinful condition(e.g., 6:5; 8:21) proves true as Noah becomes drunk and naked and hisson Ham (father of Canaan) shames him by failing to conceal hisfather’s negligence. Instead of multiplying, filling, andsubduing the earth as God has intended, humankind collaborates tomake a name for itself by building a sort of stairway to heavenwithin a special city (11:4). God foils such haughty plans byscattering the people across the earth and confusing their language.Expressed in an orderly chiastic structure, the story of the tower ofBabel demonstrates that God condescends (11:5) to set things straightwith humanity.
Patriarchs(Gen. 12–50)
Althoughthe primeval history is foundational for understanding the rest ofthe Bible, more space in Genesis is devoted to the patriarchalfigures Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph. In general, the Abrahamicnarrative spans chapters 12–25, the story of Isaac serves as atransition to the Jacob cycle of chapters 25–37, and the Josephnarrative finishes the book of Genesis in chapters 37–50.
Thetransition from the primeval history to the patriarchs (11:27–32)reveals how Abraham, the father of Israel, moves from the east andsettles in Harran as the family ventures to settle in Canaan. InHarran, Abraham receives the call of God’s redemptive plan,which reverberates through Scripture. God will bless him with land,make him a great nation, grant him special favor, and use him as aconduit of blessings to the world (12:1–3). In 11:30 is theindication that the barrenness of Abraham’s wife (Sarah)relates to the essence of God’s magnificent promises. How onebecomes great in name and number, secures enemy territory, and is tobless all peoples without a descendant becomes the compellingquestion of the Abrahamic narrative. The interchange betweenAbraham’s faith in God and his attempts to contrive covenantfulfillment colors the entire narrative leading up to chapter 22. Itis there that Abraham’s faith is ultimately put to the test asGod asks him to sacrifice the promised son, Isaac. Abraham passesGod’s faith test, and a ram is provided to take Isaac’splace. This everlasting covenant that was previously sealed by thesign of circumcision is climactically procured for future generationsthrough Abraham’s exemplary obedience (22:16–18; cf.15:1–21; 17:1–27).
Thepatriarchal stories that follow show that the Abrahamic promises arerenewed with subsequent generations (see 26:3–4; 28:13–14)and survive various threats to fulfillment. The story of Isaac servesmainly as a bridge to the Jacob cycle, as he exists primarily as apassive character in relation to Abraham and Jacob.
Deception,struggle, rivalry, and favoritism characterize the Jacob narrative,as first exemplified in the jostling of twin boys in Rebekah’swomb (25:22). Jacob supplants his twin brother, Esau, for thefirstborn’s blessing and birthright. He flees to Paddan Aram(northern Mesopotamia), marries two sisters, takes their maidservantsas concubines, and has eleven children, followed by a falling-outwith his father-in-law. Jacob’s struggle for God’sblessing that began with Esau comes to a head in his wrestlingencounter with God at Peniel. Ultimately, Jacob emerges victoriousand receives God’s blessing and a name change, “Israel”(“one who struggles with God”). Throughout the Jacobstory, God demonstrates his faithfulness to the Abrahamic covenantand reiterates the promises to Jacob, most notably at Bethel (chaps.28; 35). The interpersonal strife of Jacob’s life is thusenveloped within a message of reconciliation not just with Esau(chap. 33) but ultimately with God. The reader learns from theepisodes in Jacob’s life that although God works through thelives of weak and failing people, his promises for Israel remainsecure.
AlthoughJacob and his family are already living in Canaan, God intends forthem to move to Egypt and grow into a powerful nation beforefulfilling their conquest of the promised land (see 15:13–16).The story of Joseph explains how the family ends up in Egypt at theclose of Genesis. Joseph is specially loved by his father, whichelicits significant jealousy from his brothers, who sell him off tosome nomads and fabricate the alibi that he has been killed by a wildbeast. Joseph winds up in Pharaoh’s household and eventuallybecomes his top official. When famine strikes Canaan years later,Joseph’s brothers go to Egypt to purchase food from the royalcourt, and Joseph reveals his identity to them in an emotionalreunion. Jacob’s entire family moves to Egypt to live for atime in prosperity under Joseph’s care. The Joseph storyillustrates the mysterious relationship of human decision and divinesovereignty (50:20).
Liberationfrom Egypt (Exod. 1–18)
Genesisshows how Abraham develops into a large family. Exodus shows how thisfamily becomes a nation—enslaved, freed, and then taught theways of God. Although it appears that Exodus continues a rivetingstory of God’s chosen people, it is actually the identity andpower of God that take center stage.
Manyyears have passed since Joseph’s family arrived in Egypt. TheHebrews’ good standing in Egypt has also diminished as theirmultiplication and fruitfulness during the intervening period—justas God had promised Abraham (Gen. 17:4–8)—became anational threat to the Egyptians. Abraham’s family will spendtime in Egyptian slavery before being liberated with many possessionsin hand (cf. Gen. 15:13–14).
Inthe book of Exodus the drama of suffering and salvation serves as thevehicle for God’s self-disclosure to a single man, Moses. Mosesis an Israelite of destiny even from birth, as he providentiallyavoids infant death and rises to power and influence in Pharaoh’shousehold. Moses never loses his passion for his own people, and hekills an Egyptian who was beating a fellow Hebrew. Moses flees toobscurity in the desert, where he meets God and his call to lead hispeople out of Egypt and to the promised land (3:7–8; 6:8). Likethe days of Noah’s salvation, God has remembered his covenantwith the patriarchs and responded to the groans of his people inEgypt (2:24; 6:4–5; cf. Gen. 8:1). God reveals himself, and hispersonal name “Yahweh” (“I am”), to Moses inthe great theophany of the burning bush at Mount Horeb (Sinai), thesame place where later he will receive God’s law. Moses doubtshis own ability to carry out the task of confronting Pharaoh andleading the exodus, but God foretells that many amazing signs andwonders not only will make the escape possible but also willultimately reveal the mighty nature of God to the Hebrews, Egypt, andpresumably the world (6:7; 7:5).
Thispromise of creating a nation of his people through deliverance issuccinctly conveyed in the classic covenant formula that findssignificance in the rest of the OT: “I will take you as my ownpeople, and I will be your God” (6:7). Wielding great powerover nature and at times even human decision, God “hardens”Pharaoh’s heart and sends ten plagues to demonstrate his favorfor his own people and wrath against their enemy nation. The tenthplague on the firstborn of all in Egypt provides the context for thePassover as God spares the firstborn of Israel in response to theplacement of sacrificial blood on the doorposts of their homes.Pharaoh persists in the attempt to overtake the Israelites in thedesert, where the power of God climaxes in parting the Red Sea (orSea of Reeds). The Israelites successfully pass through, buttheEgyptian army drowns in pursuit. This is the great salvationevent of the OT.
Thesong of praise for God’s deliverance (15:1–21) quicklyturns to cries of groaning in the seventy days following the exodusas the people of the nation, grumbling about their circumstances inthe desert, quickly demonstrate their fleeting trust in the one whohas saved them (Exod. 15:22–18:27). When a shortage of waterand food confronts the people, their faith in God’s care provesshallow, and they turn on Moses. Even though the special marks ofGod’s protection have been evident in the wilderness throughthe pillars of cloud and fire, the angel of God, the provision ofmanna and quail, water from the rock, and the leadership of Moses,the nation continually fails God’s tests of trust and obedience(16:4; cf. 17:2; 20:20). Yet God continues to endure with his peoplethrough the leadership of Moses.
Sinai(Exod. 19:1–Num. 10:10)
Mostof the pentateuchal narrative takes place at Mount Sinai. It is therethat Israel receives national legislation and prescriptions for thetabernacle, the priesthood, feasts and festivals, and othercovenantal demands for living as God’s chosen people. Theeleven-month stay at Sinai takes the biblical reader through thecenter of the Pentateuch, covering approximately the last half ofExodus, all of Leviticus, and the first third of Numbers, before thenation leaves this sacred site and sojourns in the wilderness.Several key sections of the Pentateuch fall withinthe Sinaistory: the Decalogue (Exod. 20:1–17), the Book of the Covenant(Exod. 20:22–23:33), the tabernacle prescriptions (Exod.25–31), the tabernacle construction (Exod. 35–40), themanual on ritual worship (Lev. 1–7), and the Holiness Code(Lev. 17–27).
Theevents and instruction at Sinai are central to the Israelitereligious experience and reflect the third eternal covenant that Godestablishes in the Pentateuch—this time with Israel, wherebythe Sabbath is the sign (Exod. 31:16; cf. Noahic/rainbow covenant[Gen. 9:16] and the Abrahamic/circumcision covenant [Gen. 17:7, 13,19]). The offices of prophet and priest develop into clear view inthis portion of the Pentateuch. Moses exemplifies the dual propheticfunction of representing the people when speaking with God and, inturn, God when speaking to the people. The priesthood is bestowedupon Aaron and his descendants in Exodus and inaugurated within oneof the few narrative sections of Leviticus (Lev. 8–10). Thegiving of the law, the ark, the tabernacle, the priesthood, and theSabbath are all a part of God’s making himself “known”to Israel and the world, which is a constant theme in Exodus (see,e.g., 25:22; 29:43, 46; 31:13).
TheIsraelites’ stay at Sinai opens with one of the greatesttheophanies of the Bible: God speaks aloud to the people (Exod.19–20) and then is envisioned as a consuming fire (Exod. 24).After communicating the Ten Commandments (“ten words”)directly to the people (Exod. 34:28; Deut. 4:13; 10:4), Mosesmediates the rest of the detailed obligations that will govern thefuture life of the nation. The covenant is ratified in ceremonialfashion (Exod. 24), and the Israelites vow to fulfill all that hasbeen spoken. God expects Israel to be a holy nation (Exod. 19:6) withwhom he may dwell, but Moses descends Sinai only to find that theIsraelites have already violated the essence of the Decalogue byfashioning a golden calf to worship as that which delivered them fromEgypt (Exod. 32). This places Israel’s future and calling injeopardy, but Moses intercedes for his people, and God graciouslypromises to preserve the nation and abide with it in his mercy, evenwhile punishing the guilty. This becomes prototypical of God’srelationship with his people in the future (Exod. 34:6–7).
Exodusends with the consecration of the tabernacle and the descent of God’spresence there. With the tent of worship in order, the priesthood andits rituals can be officially established. Leviticus reflects divineinstructions for how a sinful people may live safely in closeproximity to God. Holy living involves dealing with sin andminimizing the need for atonement, purification, and restitution. Thesacrificial and worship system established in Leviticus is based on aworldview of order, perfection, and purity, which should characterizea people who are commanded, “Be holy because I, the Lord yourGod, am holy’ (Lev. 19:2; cf. 11:44–45; 20:26). Withthese rules in place, the Israelites can make final preparations todepart Sinai and move forward on their journey. Numbers 1–10spans a nineteen-day period of such activities as the Israelitesbegin to focus on dispossessing their enemies. These chapters reflecta census of fighting men, the priority of purity, the dedication ofthe tabernacle, and the observance of the Passover before commencingthe quest to Canaan.
WildernessJourney (Num. 10:11–36:13)
Therest of the book of Numbers covers the remainder of a forty-yearstretch of great peaks and valleys in the faith and future of thenation. Chapters 11–25 recount the various events that show theexodus generation’s lack of trust in God. Chapters 26–36reveal a more positive section whereby a new generation prepares forthe conquest. With the third section of Numbers framed by episodesinvolving the inheritance rights of Zelophehad’s daughters(27:1–11; 36:1–13), it is clear that the story has turnedtothe future possession of the land.
Afterthe departure from Sinai, the narrative consists of a number ofIsraelite complaints in the desert. The Israelites have grown tiredof manna and ironically crave the food of Egypt, which they recall asfree fish, fruits, and vegetables. Having forgotten the hardship oflife in slavery, about which they had cried out to God, now thenation is crying out for a lifestyle of old. Moses becomes sooverwhelmed with the complaints of the people that God providesseventy elders, who, to help shoulder the leadership burden, willreceive the same prophetic spirit given to Moses.
Inchapters 13–14 twelve spies are sent out from Kadesh Barnea toperuse Canaan, but the people’s lack of faith to procure theland from the mighty people there proves costly. This final exampleof distrust moves God to punish and purify the nation. Theunbelieving generation will die in the wilderness during a forty-yearperiod of wandering.
Thediscontent in the desert involves not only food and water but alsoleadership status. Moses’ own brother and sister resent hisspecial relationship with God and challenge his exclusive authority.Later, Aaron’s special high priesthood is threatened as anotherLevitical family (Korah) vies for preeminence. Through a sequence ofsigns and wonders, God makes it clear that Moses and Aaron haveexclusive roles in God’s economy. Due to the deaths related toKorah’s rebellion and the fruitless staffs that represent thetribes of Israel, the nation’s concern about sudden extinctionin the presence of a holy God is appeased through the eternalcovenant of priesthood granted to Aaron’s family (chap. 18). Heand the Levites, at the potential expense of their own lives and aspart of their priestly service, will be held accountable for keepingthe tabernacle pure of encroachers.
Evenafter the people’s significant rebellion and punishment, Godcontinues to prove his faithfulness to his word. Hope is restored forthe nation as the Abrahamic promises of blessing are rehearsed fromthe mouth of Balaam, a Mesopotamian seer. The Israelites will indeedone day be numerous (23:10), enjoy the presence of God (23:21), beblessed and protected (24:9), and have a kingly leader (24:17). Thiswonderful mountaintop experience of hope for the exodus generation istragically countered by an even greater event of apostasy in thesubsequent scene. Reminiscent of the incident of the golden calf,when pagan revelry in the camp had foiled Moses’ interactionwith God on Sinai, apostasy at the tabernacle undermines Balaam’soracles of covenant fulfillment. Fornication with Moabite women notonly joins the nation to a foreign god but also betrays God’sholiness at his place of dwelling. If not for the zeal of Aaron’sgrandson Phinehas, who puts an end to the sin, the ensuing plaguecould have finished the nation. For his righteous action, Phinehas isawarded an eternal priesthood and ensures a future for the nation andAaron’s priestly lineage.
Inchapter 26 a second census of fighting men indicates that the old,unbelieving exodus generation has officially died off (except forJoshua and Caleb), and God is proceeding with a new people. Goddispossesses the enemies of the new generation; reinstates the tribalboundaries of the land; reinstates rules concerning worship, service,and bloodshed; and places Joshua at the helm of leadership. Chapters26–36 mention no deaths or rebellions as the nationoptimistically ends its journey in Moab, just east of the promisedland.
Moses’Farewell (Deuteronomy)
Althoughone could reasonably move into the historical books at the end ofNumbers, much would be lost in overstepping Deuteronomy. Deuteronomypresents Moses’ farewell speeches as his final words to anation on the verge of Caanan. Moses’ speeches are best viewedas sermons motivating his people to embrace the Sinai covenant, lovetheir God, and choose life over death and blessings over cursings(30:19). Moses reviews the desert experience since Mount Horeb/Sinai(chaps. 1–4) and recapitulates God’s expectations forlawful living in the land (chaps. 5–26). The covenant code isrecorded on a scroll, is designated the “Book of the Law”(31:24–26), and is to be read and revered by the future king.Finally, Moses leads the nation in covenant renewal (chaps. 29–32)before the book finishes with an account of his death (chaps. 33–34),including tributes such as “since then, no prophet has risen inIsrael like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face” (34:10).
Deuteronomyreflects that true covenant faithfulness is achieved from a rightheart for God. If there were any previous doubts about the essence ofcovenant keeping, Moses eliminates such in Deuteronomy with thefrequent use of emotive terms. Loving God involves committing to himalone and spurning idols and foreign gods. The Ten Commandments(chap. 5) are not a list of stale requirements; they reflect thegreat Shema with the words “Love the Lord your God with allyour heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. Thesecommandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts”(6:5–6). God desires an unrivaled love from the nation, notcold and superficial religiosity.
Obedienceby the Israelites will incur material and spiritual blessing, whereasdisobedience ends in the loss of both. Although Moses stronglycommends covenant obedience, and the nation participates in acovenant-renewal ceremony (chap. 27), it is clear that in the futurethe Israelites will fail to uphold their covenant obligations andwill suffer the consequences (29:23; 30:1–4; 31:16–17).Yet Moses looks to a day when the command for circumcised hearts(10:16) will be fulfilled by the power of God himself (30:6). In thefuture a new king will arise from the nation (17:14–20) as wellas a prophet like Moses (18:15–22). Deuteronomy thusunderscores the extent of God’s own devotion to his patriarchalpromises despite the sinful nature of his people.
Formuch of the middle and end of the twentieth century, Deuteronomy hasreceived a significant amount of attention for its apparentresemblance in structure and content to ancient Hittite and Assyriantreaties. Scholars debate the extent of similarity, but it ispossible that Deuteronomy reflects a suzerain-vassal treaty formbetween Israel and God much like the common format between nations inthe ancient Near East. Although comparative investigation of thistype can be profitable for interpretation, it is prudent to beconservative when outlining direct parallels, since Deuteronomy isnot a legal document but rather a dramatic narrative of God’sredemptive interaction with the world.
It is difficult to imagine a world without consistentmetrological systems. Society’s basic structures, from economyto law, require a uniform and accurate method for measuring time,distances, weights, volumes, and so on. In today’s world,technological advancements allow people to measure various aspects ofthe universe with incredible accuracy—from nanometers tolight-years, milligrams to kilograms.
Themetrological systems employed in biblical times span the sameconcepts as our own modern-day systems: weight, linear distance, andvolume or capacity. However, the systems of weights and measurementsemployed during the span of biblical times were not nearly asaccurate or uniform as the modern units employed today. Preexistingweight and measurement systems existed in the contextual surroundingsof both the OT and the NT authors and thus heavily influenced thesystems employed by the Israelite nation as well as the NT writers.There was great variance between the different standards usedmerchant to merchant (Gen. 23:16), city to city, region to region,time period to time period, even despite the commands to use honestscales and honest weights (Lev. 19:35–36; Deut. 25:13–15;Prov. 11:1; 16:11; 20:23; Ezek. 45:10).
Furthermore,inconsistencies and contradictions exist within the written recordsas well as between archaeological specimens. In addition, significantdifferences are found between preexilic and postexilic measurementsin the biblical texts, and an attempt at merging dry capacity andliquid volume measurements further complicated the issue. This is tobe expected, especially when we consider modern-dayinconsistencies—for example, 1 US liquid pint= 0.473liters, while 1 US dry pint= 0.550 liters. Thus, all modernequivalents given below are approximations, and even the bestestimates have a margin of error of + 5percent or more.
Weights
Weightsin biblical times were carried in a bag or a satchel (Deut. 25:13;Prov. 16:11; Mic. 6:11) and were stones, usually carved into variousanimal shapes for easy identification. Their side or flat bottom wasinscribed with the associated weight and unit of measurement.Thousands of historical artifacts, which differ by significantamounts, have been discovered by archaeologists and thus have greatlycomplicated the work of determining accurate modern-day equivalents.
Beka.Approximately 1⁄5 ounce, or 5.6 grams. Equivalent to 10 gerahsor ½ the sanctuary shekel (Exod. 38:26). Used to measuremetals and goods such as gold (Gen. 24:22).
Gerah.1⁄50 ounce, or 0.56 grams. Equivalent to 1⁄10 beka, 1⁄20shekel (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25).
Litra.Approximately 12 ounces, or 340 grams. A Roman measure of weight.Used only twice in the NT (John 12:3; 19:39). The precursor to themodern British pound.
Mina.Approximately 1¼ pounds, or 0.56 kilograms. Equivalent to 50shekels. Used to weigh gold (1Kings 10:17; Ezra 2:69), silver(Neh. 7:71–72), and other goods. The prophet Ezekiel redefinedthe proper weight: “Theshekel is to consist of twentygerahs. Twenty shekels plus twenty-five shekels plus fifteen shekelsequal one mina” (Ezek. 45:12). Before this redefinition, therewere arguably 50 shekels per mina. In Jesus’ parable of theservants, he describes the master entrusting to his three servantsvarying amounts—10 minas, 5 minas, 1 mina—implying amonetary value (Luke 19:11–24), probably of either silver orgold. One mina was equivalent to approximately three months’wages for a laborer.
Pim.Approximately 1⁄3 ounce, or 9.3 grams. Equivalent to 2⁄3shekel. Referenced only once in the Scriptures (1Sam. 13:21).
Shekel.Approximately 2⁄5 ounce, or 11 grams. Equivalent toapproximately 2 bekas. The shekel is the basic unit of weightmeasurement in Israelite history, though its actual weight variedsignificantly at different historical points. Examples include the“royal shekel” (2Sam. 14:26), the “commonshekel” (2Kings 7:1), and the “sanctuary shekel,”which was equivalent to 20 gerahs (e.g., Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25;Num. 3:47). Because it was used to weigh out silver or gold, theshekel also functioned as a common monetary unit in the NT world.
Talent.Approximately 75 pounds, or 34 kilograms. Equivalent to approximately60 minas. Various metals were weighed using talents: gold (Exod.25:39; 37:24; 1Chron. 20:2), silver (Exod. 38:27; 1Kings20:39; 2Kings 5:22), and bronze (Exod. 38:29). This probably isderived from the weight of a load that a man could carry.
Table12. Biblical Weights and Measures and Their Modern Equivalents:
Weights
Beka– 10 geraahs; ½ shekel = 1/5 ounce = 5.6 grams
Gerah– 1/10 beka; 1/20 shekel = 1/50 ounce = 0.56 grams
Litra– 12 ounces = 340 grams
Mina– 50 shekels = 1 ¼ pounds = 0.56 kilograms
Pim– 2/3 shekel = 1/3 ounce = 9.3 grams
Shekel– 2 bekas; 20 gerahs = 2/5 ounce = 11 grams
Talent– 60 minas = 75 pounds = 34 kilograms
Linearmeasurements
Cubit– 6 handbreadths = 18 inches = 45.7 centimeters
Day’sjourney = 20-25 miles = 32-40 kilometerse
Fingerbreadth– ¼ handbreadth = ¾ inch = 1.9 centimeterse
Handbreadth– 1/6 cubit = 3 inches = 7.6 centimeters
Milion– 1 mile = 1.6 kilometers
Orguia– 1/100 stadion = 5 feet 11 inches = 1.8 meters
Reed/rod– 108 inches = 274 centimeters
Sabbathday’s journey – 2,000 cubits = ¾ mile = 1.2kilometers
Span– 3 handbreadths = 9 inches = 22.8 centimeters
Stadion– 100 orguiai = 607 feet = 185 meters
Capacity
Cab– 1 omer = ½ gallon = 1.9 liters
Choinix– ¼ gallon = 0.9 liters
Cor– 1 homer; 10 ephahs = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Ephah– 10 omers; 1/10 homer = 3/5 bushel; 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Homer– 10 ephahs; 1 cor = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Koros– 10 bushels; 95 gallons – 360 liters
Omer– 1/10 ephah; 1/100 homer = 2 quarts = 1.9 liters
Saton– 1 seah = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
Seah– 1/3 ephah; 1 saton = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
LiquidVolume
Bath– 1 ephah = 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Batos– 8 gallons = 30.3 liters
Hin– 1/6 bath; 12 logs = 1 gallon; 4 quarts = 3.8 liters
Log– 1/72 bath; 1/12 hin = 1/3 quart = 0.3 liters
Metretes– 10 gallons = 37.8 literes
LinearMeasurements
Linearmeasurements were based upon readily available natural measurementssuch as the distance between the elbow and the hand or between thethumb and the little finger. While convenient, this method ofmeasurement gave rise to significant inconsistencies.
Cubit.Approximately 18 inches, or 45.7 centimeters. Equivalent to 6handbreadths. The standard biblical measure of linear distance, asthe shekel is the standard measurement of weight. The distance fromthe elbow to the outstretched fingertip. Used to describe height,width, length (Exod. 25:10), distance (John 21:8), and depth (Gen.7:20). Use of the cubit is ancient. For simple and approximateconversion into modern units, divide the number of cubits in half formeters, then multiply the number of meters by 3 to arrive at feet.
1cubit = 2 spans = 6 handbreadths = 24 fingerbreadths
Day’sjourney.An approximate measure of distance equivalent to about 20–25miles, or 32–40 kilometers. Several passages reference a singleor multiple days’ journey as a description of the distancetraveled or the distance between two points: “a day’sjourney” (Num. 11:31; 1Kings 19:4), “a three-dayjourney” (Gen. 30:36; Exod. 3:18; 8:27; Jon. 3:3), “sevendays” (Gen. 31:23), and “eleven days” (Deut. 1:2).After visiting Jerusalem for Passover, Jesus’ parents journeyedfor a day (Luke 2:44) before realizing that he was not with them.
Fingerbreadth.The width of the finger, or ¼ of a handbreadth, approximately¾ inch, or 1.9 centimeters. The fingerbreadth was thebeginning building block of the biblical metrological system forlinear measurements. Used only once in the Scriptures, to describethe bronze pillars (Jer. 52:21).
Handbreadth.Approximately 3 inches, or 7.6 centimeters. Equivalent to 1/6 cubit,or four fingerbreadths. Probably the width at the base of the fourfingers. A short measure of length, thus compared to a human’sbrief life (Ps. 39:5). Also the width of the rim on the bread table(Exod. 25:25) and the thickness of the bronze Sea (1Kings7:26).
Milion.Translated “mile” in Matt. 5:41. Greek transliteration ofRoman measurement mille passuum, “a thousand paces.”
Orguia.Approximately 5 feet 11 inches, or 1.8 meters. Also translated as“fathom.” A Greek unit of measurement. Probably thedistance between outstretched fingertip to fingertip. Used to measurethe depth of water (Acts 27:28).
Reed/rod.Approximately 108 inches, or 274 centimeters. This is also a generalterm for a measuring device rather than a specific linear distance(Ezek. 40:3, 5; 42:16–19; Rev. 11:1; 21:15).
Sabbathday’s journey.Approximately ¾ mile, or 1.2 kilometers (Acts 1:12). About2,000 cubits.
Span.Approximately 9 inches, or 22.8 centimeters. Equivalent to threehandbreadths, and ½ cubit. The distance from outstretchedthumb tip to little-finger tip. The length and width of the priest’sbreastpiece (Exod. 28:16).
Stadion.Approximately 607 feet, or 185 meters. Equivalent to 100 orguiai.Used in the measurement of large distances (Matt. 14:24; Luke 24:13;John 6:19; 11:18; Rev. 14:20; 21:16).
LandArea
Seed.The size of a piece of land could also be measured on the basis ofhow much seed was required to plant that field (Lev. 27:16; 1Kings18:32).
Yoke.Fields and lands were measured using logical, available means. Inbiblical times, this meant the amount of land a pair of yoked animalscould plow in one day (1Sam. 14:14; Isa. 5:10).
Capacity
Cab.Approximately ½ gallon, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1 omer.Mentioned only once in the Scriptures, during the siege of Samaria(2Kings 6:25).
Choinix.Approximately ¼ gallon, or 0.9 liters. A Greek measurement,mentioned only once in Scripture (Rev. 6:6).
Cor.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equal to thehomer, and to 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularlyof flour and grains (1Kings 4:22; 1Kings 5:11; 2Chron.2:10; 27:5; Ezra 7:22). In the LXX, cor is also a measure of liquidvolume, particularly oil (1Kings 5:11; 2Chron. 2:10; Ezra45:14).
Ephah.Approximately 3⁄5 bushel (6 gallons, or 22.7 liters).Equivalent to 10 omers, or 1⁄10 homer. Used for measuring flourand grains (e.g., Exod. 29:40; Lev. 6:20). Isaiah prophesied a day ofreduced agricultural yield, when a homer of seed would produce onlyan ephah of grain (Isa. 5:10). The ephah was equal in size to thebath (Ezek. 45:11), which typically was used for liquid measurements.
Homer.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equivalent to1 cor, or 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularly ofvarious grains (Lev. 27:16; Isa. 5:10; Ezek. 45:11, 13–14; Hos.3:2). This is probably a natural measure of the load that a donkeycan carry, in the range of 90 kilograms. There may have existed adirect link between capacity and monetary value, given Lev. 27:16:“fifty shekels of silver to a homer of barley seed.” Alogical deduction of capacity and cost based on known equivalencesmight look something like this:
1homer = 1 mina; 1 ephah = 5 shekels; 1 omer = 1 beka
Koros.Approximately 10 bushels (95 gallons, or 360 liters). A Greek measureof grain (Luke 16:7).
Omer.Approximately 2 quarts, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄10ephah, 1⁄100 homer (Ezek. 45:11). Used by Israel in themeasurement and collection of manna in the wilderness (Exod.16:16–36) and thus roughly equivalent to a person’s dailyfood ration.
Saton.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1 seah. Themeasurement of flour in Jesus’ parable of the kingdom of heaven(Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:21).
Seah.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄3 ephah,or 1 saton. Used to measure flour, grain, seed, and other various drygoods (e.g., 2Kings 7:1; 1Sam. 25:18).
LiquidVolume
Bath.Approximately 6 gallons, or 22.7 liters. Equivalent to 1 ephah, whichtypically was used for measurements of dry capacity. Used in themeasurement of water (1Kings 7:26), oil (1Kings 5:11),and wine (2Chron. 2:10; Isa. 5:10).
Batos.Approximately 8 gallons, or 30.3 liters. A Greek transliteration ofthe Hebrew word bath(see above). A measure of oil (Luke 16:6).
Hin.Approximately 4 quarts (1gallon, or 3.8 liters). Equivalent to1⁄6 bath and 12 logs. Used in the measurement of water (Ezek.4:11), oil (Ezek. 46:5), and wine (Num. 28:14).
Log.Approximately 1⁄3 quart, or 0.3 liter. Equivalent to 1⁄72bath and 1⁄12 hin. Mentioned five times in Scripture,specifically used to measure oil (Lev. 14:10–24).
Metretes.Approximately 10 gallons, or 37.8 liters. Used in the measurement ofwater at the wedding feast (John 2:6).
Jesus Christ is the centerpiece of the Christian Scriptures. The meaning and interpretation of both Testaments is properly grasped only in light of the person and work of Jesus Christ. That is not to say that the Testaments testify to Jesus Christ in the exact same way; they obviously do not, but both Testaments are part of the inscripturated revelation that, in light of the incarnation, proclaims Jesus Christ to be the fullest manifestation of God given to humankind.
Old Testament
According to the Scriptures. The early Christians were adamant that the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ happened “according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:3–4), which meant that these events lined up with Israel’s sacred traditions. On the road to Emmaus the risen Jesus explained to the two travelers the things concerning himself “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” in relation to the death and glorification of the Messiah (Luke 24:27). In one of the major Johannine discourses, Jesus tells the Pharisees that the Scriptures “testify about me” (John 5:39). Early Christian authors could find certain key texts that demonstrated the conformity of the Christ-event to the pattern of Israel’s Scriptures, such as Pss. 2; 110; 118; Isa. 53. Yet much of the OT can be understood without mention of Jesus Christ in relation to its own historical context, and there is the danger of overly allegorizing OT texts in order to make them say something about Jesus Christ and the church.
The relationship between the Testaments. The way that the NT authors echo, allude to, quote, and interpret the OT is a complex matter, but at least two points need to be made about the relationship between the two Testaments.
First, the OT anticipates and illuminates the coming of Jesus Christ. “Anticipate” does not mean “predict,” but the law and the prophets foreshadow the offices and identity of Jesus Christ. The offices of prophet, priest, and king in the OT prefigure the ministry of Christ, who is the one who reveals God, intercedes on behalf of humankind, and is the Messiah and Lord. The sacrificial cultus, with the necessity of shedding blood for the removal of sin, prefigures the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ. This is why the law is a “shadow” of the one who was to come (Col. 2:17; Heb. 10:1). “Illuminate” means that certain OT texts, though not referring to Jesus in their historical or literary context, explain aspects of his person and work. This is seen most clearly in the way that the psalms are used in the NT. Texts such as Pss. 2:7; 110:1–4 provided biblical categories that explained the nature of Jesus’ sonship, the quality of his priestly ministry, and his installation as God’s vice-regent.
Second, we should differentiate between prophecy and typology. The prophetic promises in Ezek. 37; Amos 9; and Mic. 4 about a future Davidic king whom God will use to save and restore Israel are genuine prophecies that look forward to a future event yet to be fulfilled. These texts set forth the job description of the Messiah as the renewal and restoration of Israel from bondage and exile. It is unsurprising then that in Acts, James the brother of Jesus could cite Amos 9:11–12 as proof that Gentiles should be accepted into the people of God with the coming of the Messiah (Acts 15:15–18).
Typological interpretation, on the other hand, sees OT persons, places, or events as prototypes or patterns of NT persons, places, or events. For example, in Rom. 5:14 Paul says that Adam is a “type” or “pattern” of the one to come. Similarly, Matthew’s use of Isa. 7:14 in Matt. 1:23 is also typological rather than prophetic. In the context of Isaiah, the promise refers to a child born during the reign of King Ahaz as a sign that the Judean kingdom will survive the Assyrian onslaught. Matthew’s citation does not demand an exact correspondence of events as much as it postulates a correlation of patterns or types between Isaiah’s narrative and the Matthean birth story. The coming of God’s Son, the manifestation of God’s presence, and the rescue of Israel through a child born to a young girl bring to Matthew’s mind Isa. 7 as an obvious prophetic precedent, repeated at a new juncture of redemptive history.
A Christology of the Old Testament. The NT authors interpreted the OT in search of answers to questions pertaining to the identity and ministry of Jesus Christ, the nature of the people of God, and the arrival of the new age. They detected patterns in the OT that were repeated or recapitulated in Jesus’ own person. They proclaimed that the prophetic promises made to Israel had been made good in Jesus Christ, and they found allusions to the various events of his life, death, and exaltation. Jesus and Israel’s Scriptures became a mutually interpretive spiral whereby the Christians began to understand the OT in light of Jesus and understood Jesus in light of the OT. In this canonical setting we can legitimately develop a “Christology of the Old Testament.”
New Testament
The Gospels. The canonical Gospels are four ancient biographies that pay attention to the history and significance of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. They represent a testimony to Jesus and embody the collective memory of his person and actions as they were transmitted and interpreted by Christians in the Greco-Roman world of the mid- to late first century.
All four Gospels follow the same basic outline by variably detailing Jesus’ ministry, passion, and exaltation, and all of them place the story of Jesus in the context of the fulfillment of the story of Israel. At the same time, each Gospel in its plot and portrayal of Jesus remains distinctive in its own right. Yet they are not four different Jesuses, but rather four parallel portraits of Jesus, much like four stained-glass windows or four paintings depict the same person in different ways.
The Gospel of Matthew portrays Jesus as the long-awaited Davidic Messiah of Israel, with a focus on his teaching authority as a type of new Moses. The Gospel of Mark describes Jesus as the powerful Son of God and concurrently as the suffering Son of Man, whose cross reveals the reality of his identity and mission. The Gospel of Luke emphasizes Jesus’ role as an anointed prophet with a special concern for the poor and outcasts and his role as dispenser of the Holy Spirit. Without flattening the distinctive christological shape of each of the Synoptic Gospels, we could say that they focus on Jesus as the proclaimer of the kingdom of God and as king of the very same kingdom.
The Gospel of John has its own set of characteristic emphases in which Jesus’ consciousness of his divine nature and purpose is heightened. Programmatic for the entirety of John’s Gospel is the prologue in 1:1–18 about the “Word [who] became flesh,” which gives a clear theology of incarnation and revelation associated with Jesus’ coming. There is also much material unique to John’s Gospel, such as the “I am” statements that further exposit the nature of Jesus’ person and the climactic confession by Thomas that Jesus is “my Lord and my God” (20:28).
The Gospels indicate that mere knowledge that Jesus died for the purpose of salvation is an insufficient understanding of him. What is also needed, and what they provide, is an understanding of his teachings and his mission in light of Israel’s Scriptures and in view of the sociopolitical situation of Palestine. Jesus came to redeem and renew Israel so that a transformed Israel would transform the world.
Acts. The book of Acts contains the story of the emergence of the early church from Jerusalem to Rome. Even though Acts is a repository of apostolic preaching and plots the beginnings of the Gentile mission, it is the sequel to Luke’s Gospel and is very much the story of Jesus in perfect tense (i.e., a past event with ongoing significance). The most succinct summary of the Christology of Acts is in Peter’s speech in Jerusalem, where he states that “this Jesus” whom they crucified has been made both “Lord and Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” by God (2:36). In the succeeding narratives emphasis is given to “Jesus is the Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” (e.g., 9:22; 17:3; 18:5), which is a message pertinent to Jews and Gentiles (20:21).
Paul’s Letters. The Pauline Epistles, although they are situational, pastoral, and not given primarily to christological exposition, still exhibit beliefs about Jesus held by Paul and his Christian contemporaries. The high points of Paul’s Christology can be detected in his use of traditional material such as Col. 1:15–20, which exposits the sufficiency and the supremacy of Christ. Philippians 2:5–11 narrates the story of the incarnation as an example of self-giving love. In 1 Cor. 8:6 Paul offers a Christianized version of the Shema of Deut. 6:4. There is a petition to Jesus as “Come, Lord!” in 1 Cor. 16:22. Paul can also refer to Jesus as God in Rom. 9:5 (although the grammar is ambiguous). For Paul, Jesus is both the “heavenly man” (1 Cor. 15:47–49) and the Son to come from heaven (1 Thess. 1:10). This interest in the divine Son of God does not mean that Paul was ignorant of or disinterested in the life and teachings of Jesus. Elsewhere he implies knowledge of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Rom. 14:14; 1 Cor. 7:10–11) and refers to the incarnation (e.g., 2 Cor. 8:9; Col. 2:9).
A number of titles are used to describe Jesus in Paul’s letters, including “Lord” and “Christ/Messiah” (and variations such as “Lord Jesus Christ” and “Christ Jesus”), “Savior,” and “Seed of David” (Rom. 1:3). But probably the most apt expression of Jesus’ nature according to Paul is “Son of God” (e.g., Rom. 1:4; 2 Cor. 1:19; Gal. 2:20). This language of sonship suggests that Jesus is the means of God’s salvation and glory and is the special agent through whom the Father acts. Referring to Jesus as “Son” also underscores Jesus’ unique relationship to God the Father and his unique role in executing the ordained plan of salvation for the elect.
We might also add that Paul provides the building blocks of what would later become a full-blown trinitarian theology, such as in the benediction of 2 Cor. 13:14 and in general exhortations about the gospel (1 Cor. 2:1–5). It must be emphasized that Paul’s Christology cannot be separated from his eschatology, soteriology, and ecclesiology. The sending of God’s Son (see Rom. 8:3; Gal. 4:4–5) into the world marks the coming of redemption and salvation through the cross and resurrection of the Son, and these are appropriated by faith. Those who believe become members of the restored Israel, the renewed Adamic race, and constituent members of the body of Christ. To that we might add the experiential element of Paul’s Christology as Jesus is known in the experience of salvation, prayer, and worship (e.g., Gal. 2:19–20).
The General Letters. The General Letters (also called the Catholic Epistles) provide a further array of images and explorations into the person and work of Jesus Christ and how they relate to the community of faith. The message of Hebrews is essentially “Jesus is better!” He is better than the angels and better than Moses; he is a better high priest; he offers a better sacrifice, establishes a better law, and instigates a better covenant. This letter is a sermonic exhortation against falling away from the faith (e.g., 2:1–4), and toward that end the author sets before his readers the magnificence of Jesus Christ, who is “the same yesterday and today and forever” (13:8).
James has little christological content and focuses instead on exhortations that bear remarkable resemblance to the teachings of Jesus from the Gospels. Even so, the letter makes passing reference to the “glorious Lord Jesus Christ” (2:1; cf. 1:1).
Central to 1 Peter is the glory and salvation that will be manifested at the revelation of Jesus Christ at his second coming (1:5, 7, 9, 13; 4:13; 5:1). Much attention is given to Jesus’ sacrificial death as a lamb (1:19), the example of his suffering (2:21–23; 4:1–2, 13), and the substitutionary nature of his death (2:24; 3:18). He is the Shepherd and Overseer of the souls of Christians (2:25). Peter writes this to encourage congregations in Asia Minor living under adverse conditions, and he sets before them the pattern of Jesus as a model for their own journey.
In 2 Peter we find a mix of Jewish eschatological concepts and Hellenistic religious language, with the author seeking to defend the apostolic gospel in a pagan culture. Jesus is the source of knowledge (1:2, 8; 2:20) and righteousness (1:1). Much emphasis is given to the coming kingdom of Jesus Christ (1:11, 16; 3:10). Jesus is the sustainer and renewer of the church and also the coming judge of the entire world.
Similar themes can be found in Jude, which is addressed to a group of believers who have been infiltrated by false teachers promoting licentiousness. Jude declares the infiltrators to be condemned and calls on the believers to hold fast to the faith. Jesus is the “Sovereign and Lord” (v. 4), Jesus saved people out of Egypt during the exodus (v. 5 [but see marginal notes on the variant reading “Lord”]), the second coming of Jesus will mark the revelation of his “mercy” (v. 21), and the benediction ascribes “glory, majesty, power and authority” to God through Jesus (v. 25). Most characteristic of all is the emphasis upon Jesus/God as the one who keeps the believers in the grip of his saving power (vv. 1, 21, 23).
The Letters of John take up where the Gospel of John left off, focusing on Jesus as the incarnate Word of God. The first of the three Johannine Epistles appears to have been written in a context where a community of Christians was being pressured by Jews to deny that Jesus is the Messiah (2:22) and also by dissident docetists to deny that Jesus had a physical body (4:2; 5:6). The major focus, however, is on Jesus as the Son of God (1:3, 7; 2:23; 3:8, 23; 4:9–10, 15; 5:11) and the incarnation of God’s very own truth and love (3:16; cf. 2 John 3).
Revelation. The Christology of the book of Revelation is best summed up in the opening description of Jesus as “him who is, and who was, and who is to come,” which underscores the lordship of Jesus over the past, present, and future. John then describes Jesus with the threefold titles “the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth” (1:4–5). In many ways, the story and Christology of Revelation are paradoxical. Jesus is both the victim of Roman violence and the victor over human evil. Jesus is the suffering “Lamb of God” and the powerful “Lion of the tribe of Judah.” In Rev. 4–5 we are given a picture of the worship in heaven and the enthronement of Jesus, and yet the realities on earth are a dearth of heavenly goodness, with persecution and apostasy rampant (Rev. 1–3). This tension continues until the final revelation of Jesus, when the heavenly Lord returns to bring the goodness and power of heaven to transform the perils of the earth and bring his people into the new Jerusalem.
Summary
The primary fixtures of a biblical Christology are (1) Jesus Christ is the promised deliverer intimated in Israel’s Scriptures, whose identity and mission are anticipated and illuminated by the law and the prophets; (2) the man Jesus of Nazareth is identified with the risen and exalted Lord Jesus Christ; and (3) Jesus participates in the very identity and being of God. See also Jesus Christ.
Jesus Christ is the centerpiece of the Christian Scriptures. The meaning and interpretation of both Testaments is properly grasped only in light of the person and work of Jesus Christ. That is not to say that the Testaments testify to Jesus Christ in the exact same way; they obviously do not, but both Testaments are part of the inscripturated revelation that, in light of the incarnation, proclaims Jesus Christ to be the fullest manifestation of God given to humankind.
Old Testament
According to the Scriptures. The early Christians were adamant that the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ happened “according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:3–4), which meant that these events lined up with Israel’s sacred traditions. On the road to Emmaus the risen Jesus explained to the two travelers the things concerning himself “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” in relation to the death and glorification of the Messiah (Luke 24:27). In one of the major Johannine discourses, Jesus tells the Pharisees that the Scriptures “testify about me” (John 5:39). Early Christian authors could find certain key texts that demonstrated the conformity of the Christ-event to the pattern of Israel’s Scriptures, such as Pss. 2; 110; 118; Isa. 53. Yet much of the OT can be understood without mention of Jesus Christ in relation to its own historical context, and there is the danger of overly allegorizing OT texts in order to make them say something about Jesus Christ and the church.
The relationship between the Testaments. The way that the NT authors echo, allude to, quote, and interpret the OT is a complex matter, but at least two points need to be made about the relationship between the two Testaments.
First, the OT anticipates and illuminates the coming of Jesus Christ. “Anticipate” does not mean “predict,” but the law and the prophets foreshadow the offices and identity of Jesus Christ. The offices of prophet, priest, and king in the OT prefigure the ministry of Christ, who is the one who reveals God, intercedes on behalf of humankind, and is the Messiah and Lord. The sacrificial cultus, with the necessity of shedding blood for the removal of sin, prefigures the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ. This is why the law is a “shadow” of the one who was to come (Col. 2:17; Heb. 10:1). “Illuminate” means that certain OT texts, though not referring to Jesus in their historical or literary context, explain aspects of his person and work. This is seen most clearly in the way that the psalms are used in the NT. Texts such as Pss. 2:7; 110:1–4 provided biblical categories that explained the nature of Jesus’ sonship, the quality of his priestly ministry, and his installation as God’s vice-regent.
Second, we should differentiate between prophecy and typology. The prophetic promises in Ezek. 37; Amos 9; and Mic. 4 about a future Davidic king whom God will use to save and restore Israel are genuine prophecies that look forward to a future event yet to be fulfilled. These texts set forth the job description of the Messiah as the renewal and restoration of Israel from bondage and exile. It is unsurprising then that in Acts, James the brother of Jesus could cite Amos 9:11–12 as proof that Gentiles should be accepted into the people of God with the coming of the Messiah (Acts 15:15–18).
Typological interpretation, on the other hand, sees OT persons, places, or events as prototypes or patterns of NT persons, places, or events. For example, in Rom. 5:14 Paul says that Adam is a “type” or “pattern” of the one to come. Similarly, Matthew’s use of Isa. 7:14 in Matt. 1:23 is also typological rather than prophetic. In the context of Isaiah, the promise refers to a child born during the reign of King Ahaz as a sign that the Judean kingdom will survive the Assyrian onslaught. Matthew’s citation does not demand an exact correspondence of events as much as it postulates a correlation of patterns or types between Isaiah’s narrative and the Matthean birth story. The coming of God’s Son, the manifestation of God’s presence, and the rescue of Israel through a child born to a young girl bring to Matthew’s mind Isa. 7 as an obvious prophetic precedent, repeated at a new juncture of redemptive history.
A Christology of the Old Testament. The NT authors interpreted the OT in search of answers to questions pertaining to the identity and ministry of Jesus Christ, the nature of the people of God, and the arrival of the new age. They detected patterns in the OT that were repeated or recapitulated in Jesus’ own person. They proclaimed that the prophetic promises made to Israel had been made good in Jesus Christ, and they found allusions to the various events of his life, death, and exaltation. Jesus and Israel’s Scriptures became a mutually interpretive spiral whereby the Christians began to understand the OT in light of Jesus and understood Jesus in light of the OT. In this canonical setting we can legitimately develop a “Christology of the Old Testament.”
New Testament
The Gospels. The canonical Gospels are four ancient biographies that pay attention to the history and significance of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. They represent a testimony to Jesus and embody the collective memory of his person and actions as they were transmitted and interpreted by Christians in the Greco-Roman world of the mid- to late first century.
All four Gospels follow the same basic outline by variably detailing Jesus’ ministry, passion, and exaltation, and all of them place the story of Jesus in the context of the fulfillment of the story of Israel. At the same time, each Gospel in its plot and portrayal of Jesus remains distinctive in its own right. Yet they are not four different Jesuses, but rather four parallel portraits of Jesus, much like four stained-glass windows or four paintings depict the same person in different ways.
The Gospel of Matthew portrays Jesus as the long-awaited Davidic Messiah of Israel, with a focus on his teaching authority as a type of new Moses. The Gospel of Mark describes Jesus as the powerful Son of God and concurrently as the suffering Son of Man, whose cross reveals the reality of his identity and mission. The Gospel of Luke emphasizes Jesus’ role as an anointed prophet with a special concern for the poor and outcasts and his role as dispenser of the Holy Spirit. Without flattening the distinctive christological shape of each of the Synoptic Gospels, we could say that they focus on Jesus as the proclaimer of the kingdom of God and as king of the very same kingdom.
The Gospel of John has its own set of characteristic emphases in which Jesus’ consciousness of his divine nature and purpose is heightened. Programmatic for the entirety of John’s Gospel is the prologue in 1:1–18 about the “Word [who] became flesh,” which gives a clear theology of incarnation and revelation associated with Jesus’ coming. There is also much material unique to John’s Gospel, such as the “I am” statements that further exposit the nature of Jesus’ person and the climactic confession by Thomas that Jesus is “my Lord and my God” (20:28).
The Gospels indicate that mere knowledge that Jesus died for the purpose of salvation is an insufficient understanding of him. What is also needed, and what they provide, is an understanding of his teachings and his mission in light of Israel’s Scriptures and in view of the sociopolitical situation of Palestine. Jesus came to redeem and renew Israel so that a transformed Israel would transform the world.
Acts. The book of Acts contains the story of the emergence of the early church from Jerusalem to Rome. Even though Acts is a repository of apostolic preaching and plots the beginnings of the Gentile mission, it is the sequel to Luke’s Gospel and is very much the story of Jesus in perfect tense (i.e., a past event with ongoing significance). The most succinct summary of the Christology of Acts is in Peter’s speech in Jerusalem, where he states that “this Jesus” whom they crucified has been made both “Lord and Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” by God (2:36). In the succeeding narratives emphasis is given to “Jesus is the Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” (e.g., 9:22; 17:3; 18:5), which is a message pertinent to Jews and Gentiles (20:21).
Paul’s Letters. The Pauline Epistles, although they are situational, pastoral, and not given primarily to christological exposition, still exhibit beliefs about Jesus held by Paul and his Christian contemporaries. The high points of Paul’s Christology can be detected in his use of traditional material such as Col. 1:15–20, which exposits the sufficiency and the supremacy of Christ. Philippians 2:5–11 narrates the story of the incarnation as an example of self-giving love. In 1 Cor. 8:6 Paul offers a Christianized version of the Shema of Deut. 6:4. There is a petition to Jesus as “Come, Lord!” in 1 Cor. 16:22. Paul can also refer to Jesus as God in Rom. 9:5 (although the grammar is ambiguous). For Paul, Jesus is both the “heavenly man” (1 Cor. 15:47–49) and the Son to come from heaven (1 Thess. 1:10). This interest in the divine Son of God does not mean that Paul was ignorant of or disinterested in the life and teachings of Jesus. Elsewhere he implies knowledge of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Rom. 14:14; 1 Cor. 7:10–11) and refers to the incarnation (e.g., 2 Cor. 8:9; Col. 2:9).
A number of titles are used to describe Jesus in Paul’s letters, including “Lord” and “Christ/Messiah” (and variations such as “Lord Jesus Christ” and “Christ Jesus”), “Savior,” and “Seed of David” (Rom. 1:3). But probably the most apt expression of Jesus’ nature according to Paul is “Son of God” (e.g., Rom. 1:4; 2 Cor. 1:19; Gal. 2:20). This language of sonship suggests that Jesus is the means of God’s salvation and glory and is the special agent through whom the Father acts. Referring to Jesus as “Son” also underscores Jesus’ unique relationship to God the Father and his unique role in executing the ordained plan of salvation for the elect.
We might also add that Paul provides the building blocks of what would later become a full-blown trinitarian theology, such as in the benediction of 2 Cor. 13:14 and in general exhortations about the gospel (1 Cor. 2:1–5). It must be emphasized that Paul’s Christology cannot be separated from his eschatology, soteriology, and ecclesiology. The sending of God’s Son (see Rom. 8:3; Gal. 4:4–5) into the world marks the coming of redemption and salvation through the cross and resurrection of the Son, and these are appropriated by faith. Those who believe become members of the restored Israel, the renewed Adamic race, and constituent members of the body of Christ. To that we might add the experiential element of Paul’s Christology as Jesus is known in the experience of salvation, prayer, and worship (e.g., Gal. 2:19–20).
The General Letters. The General Letters (also called the Catholic Epistles) provide a further array of images and explorations into the person and work of Jesus Christ and how they relate to the community of faith. The message of Hebrews is essentially “Jesus is better!” He is better than the angels and better than Moses; he is a better high priest; he offers a better sacrifice, establishes a better law, and instigates a better covenant. This letter is a sermonic exhortation against falling away from the faith (e.g., 2:1–4), and toward that end the author sets before his readers the magnificence of Jesus Christ, who is “the same yesterday and today and forever” (13:8).
James has little christological content and focuses instead on exhortations that bear remarkable resemblance to the teachings of Jesus from the Gospels. Even so, the letter makes passing reference to the “glorious Lord Jesus Christ” (2:1; cf. 1:1).
Central to 1 Peter is the glory and salvation that will be manifested at the revelation of Jesus Christ at his second coming (1:5, 7, 9, 13; 4:13; 5:1). Much attention is given to Jesus’ sacrificial death as a lamb (1:19), the example of his suffering (2:21–23; 4:1–2, 13), and the substitutionary nature of his death (2:24; 3:18). He is the Shepherd and Overseer of the souls of Christians (2:25). Peter writes this to encourage congregations in Asia Minor living under adverse conditions, and he sets before them the pattern of Jesus as a model for their own journey.
In 2 Peter we find a mix of Jewish eschatological concepts and Hellenistic religious language, with the author seeking to defend the apostolic gospel in a pagan culture. Jesus is the source of knowledge (1:2, 8; 2:20) and righteousness (1:1). Much emphasis is given to the coming kingdom of Jesus Christ (1:11, 16; 3:10). Jesus is the sustainer and renewer of the church and also the coming judge of the entire world.
Similar themes can be found in Jude, which is addressed to a group of believers who have been infiltrated by false teachers promoting licentiousness. Jude declares the infiltrators to be condemned and calls on the believers to hold fast to the faith. Jesus is the “Sovereign and Lord” (v. 4), Jesus saved people out of Egypt during the exodus (v. 5 [but see marginal notes on the variant reading “Lord”]), the second coming of Jesus will mark the revelation of his “mercy” (v. 21), and the benediction ascribes “glory, majesty, power and authority” to God through Jesus (v. 25). Most characteristic of all is the emphasis upon Jesus/God as the one who keeps the believers in the grip of his saving power (vv. 1, 21, 23).
The Letters of John take up where the Gospel of John left off, focusing on Jesus as the incarnate Word of God. The first of the three Johannine Epistles appears to have been written in a context where a community of Christians was being pressured by Jews to deny that Jesus is the Messiah (2:22) and also by dissident docetists to deny that Jesus had a physical body (4:2; 5:6). The major focus, however, is on Jesus as the Son of God (1:3, 7; 2:23; 3:8, 23; 4:9–10, 15; 5:11) and the incarnation of God’s very own truth and love (3:16; cf. 2 John 3).
Revelation. The Christology of the book of Revelation is best summed up in the opening description of Jesus as “him who is, and who was, and who is to come,” which underscores the lordship of Jesus over the past, present, and future. John then describes Jesus with the threefold titles “the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth” (1:4–5). In many ways, the story and Christology of Revelation are paradoxical. Jesus is both the victim of Roman violence and the victor over human evil. Jesus is the suffering “Lamb of God” and the powerful “Lion of the tribe of Judah.” In Rev. 4–5 we are given a picture of the worship in heaven and the enthronement of Jesus, and yet the realities on earth are a dearth of heavenly goodness, with persecution and apostasy rampant (Rev. 1–3). This tension continues until the final revelation of Jesus, when the heavenly Lord returns to bring the goodness and power of heaven to transform the perils of the earth and bring his people into the new Jerusalem.
Summary
The primary fixtures of a biblical Christology are (1) Jesus Christ is the promised deliverer intimated in Israel’s Scriptures, whose identity and mission are anticipated and illuminated by the law and the prophets; (2) the man Jesus of Nazareth is identified with the risen and exalted Lord Jesus Christ; and (3) Jesus participates in the very identity and being of God. See also Jesus Christ.
Husband of a woman named “Mary,” who is mentionedat the crucifixion scene in John 19:25. Depending on how the Greektext is read, “Mary of Clopas” may be in apposition to“his mother’s sister,” or it may refer to a fourthwoman present at the cross. If the former, Clopas was Jesus’relative (uncle, cousin, or grandfather) on his mother’s side.According to Hegesippus (as cited by Eusebius), Clopas was Joseph’sbrother and the father of Simeon (or Simon), who succeeded Jesus’brother James as head of the Jerusalem church. “Clopas”is a Semitic name. “Cleopas,” found in Luke 24:18, is aGreek spelling, but it perhaps refers to the same individual.
Jesus Christ is the centerpiece of the Christian Scriptures. The meaning and interpretation of both Testaments is properly grasped only in light of the person and work of Jesus Christ. That is not to say that the Testaments testify to Jesus Christ in the exact same way; they obviously do not, but both Testaments are part of the inscripturated revelation that, in light of the incarnation, proclaims Jesus Christ to be the fullest manifestation of God given to humankind.
Old Testament
According to the Scriptures. The early Christians were adamant that the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ happened “according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:3–4), which meant that these events lined up with Israel’s sacred traditions. On the road to Emmaus the risen Jesus explained to the two travelers the things concerning himself “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” in relation to the death and glorification of the Messiah (Luke 24:27). In one of the major Johannine discourses, Jesus tells the Pharisees that the Scriptures “testify about me” (John 5:39). Early Christian authors could find certain key texts that demonstrated the conformity of the Christ-event to the pattern of Israel’s Scriptures, such as Pss. 2; 110; 118; Isa. 53. Yet much of the OT can be understood without mention of Jesus Christ in relation to its own historical context, and there is the danger of overly allegorizing OT texts in order to make them say something about Jesus Christ and the church.
The relationship between the Testaments. The way that the NT authors echo, allude to, quote, and interpret the OT is a complex matter, but at least two points need to be made about the relationship between the two Testaments.
First, the OT anticipates and illuminates the coming of Jesus Christ. “Anticipate” does not mean “predict,” but the law and the prophets foreshadow the offices and identity of Jesus Christ. The offices of prophet, priest, and king in the OT prefigure the ministry of Christ, who is the one who reveals God, intercedes on behalf of humankind, and is the Messiah and Lord. The sacrificial cultus, with the necessity of shedding blood for the removal of sin, prefigures the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ. This is why the law is a “shadow” of the one who was to come (Col. 2:17; Heb. 10:1). “Illuminate” means that certain OT texts, though not referring to Jesus in their historical or literary context, explain aspects of his person and work. This is seen most clearly in the way that the psalms are used in the NT. Texts such as Pss. 2:7; 110:1–4 provided biblical categories that explained the nature of Jesus’ sonship, the quality of his priestly ministry, and his installation as God’s vice-regent.
Second, we should differentiate between prophecy and typology. The prophetic promises in Ezek. 37; Amos 9; and Mic. 4 about a future Davidic king whom God will use to save and restore Israel are genuine prophecies that look forward to a future event yet to be fulfilled. These texts set forth the job description of the Messiah as the renewal and restoration of Israel from bondage and exile. It is unsurprising then that in Acts, James the brother of Jesus could cite Amos 9:11–12 as proof that Gentiles should be accepted into the people of God with the coming of the Messiah (Acts 15:15–18).
Typological interpretation, on the other hand, sees OT persons, places, or events as prototypes or patterns of NT persons, places, or events. For example, in Rom. 5:14 Paul says that Adam is a “type” or “pattern” of the one to come. Similarly, Matthew’s use of Isa. 7:14 in Matt. 1:23 is also typological rather than prophetic. In the context of Isaiah, the promise refers to a child born during the reign of King Ahaz as a sign that the Judean kingdom will survive the Assyrian onslaught. Matthew’s citation does not demand an exact correspondence of events as much as it postulates a correlation of patterns or types between Isaiah’s narrative and the Matthean birth story. The coming of God’s Son, the manifestation of God’s presence, and the rescue of Israel through a child born to a young girl bring to Matthew’s mind Isa. 7 as an obvious prophetic precedent, repeated at a new juncture of redemptive history.
A Christology of the Old Testament. The NT authors interpreted the OT in search of answers to questions pertaining to the identity and ministry of Jesus Christ, the nature of the people of God, and the arrival of the new age. They detected patterns in the OT that were repeated or recapitulated in Jesus’ own person. They proclaimed that the prophetic promises made to Israel had been made good in Jesus Christ, and they found allusions to the various events of his life, death, and exaltation. Jesus and Israel’s Scriptures became a mutually interpretive spiral whereby the Christians began to understand the OT in light of Jesus and understood Jesus in light of the OT. In this canonical setting we can legitimately develop a “Christology of the Old Testament.”
New Testament
The Gospels. The canonical Gospels are four ancient biographies that pay attention to the history and significance of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. They represent a testimony to Jesus and embody the collective memory of his person and actions as they were transmitted and interpreted by Christians in the Greco-Roman world of the mid- to late first century.
All four Gospels follow the same basic outline by variably detailing Jesus’ ministry, passion, and exaltation, and all of them place the story of Jesus in the context of the fulfillment of the story of Israel. At the same time, each Gospel in its plot and portrayal of Jesus remains distinctive in its own right. Yet they are not four different Jesuses, but rather four parallel portraits of Jesus, much like four stained-glass windows or four paintings depict the same person in different ways.
The Gospel of Matthew portrays Jesus as the long-awaited Davidic Messiah of Israel, with a focus on his teaching authority as a type of new Moses. The Gospel of Mark describes Jesus as the powerful Son of God and concurrently as the suffering Son of Man, whose cross reveals the reality of his identity and mission. The Gospel of Luke emphasizes Jesus’ role as an anointed prophet with a special concern for the poor and outcasts and his role as dispenser of the Holy Spirit. Without flattening the distinctive christological shape of each of the Synoptic Gospels, we could say that they focus on Jesus as the proclaimer of the kingdom of God and as king of the very same kingdom.
The Gospel of John has its own set of characteristic emphases in which Jesus’ consciousness of his divine nature and purpose is heightened. Programmatic for the entirety of John’s Gospel is the prologue in 1:1–18 about the “Word [who] became flesh,” which gives a clear theology of incarnation and revelation associated with Jesus’ coming. There is also much material unique to John’s Gospel, such as the “I am” statements that further exposit the nature of Jesus’ person and the climactic confession by Thomas that Jesus is “my Lord and my God” (20:28).
The Gospels indicate that mere knowledge that Jesus died for the purpose of salvation is an insufficient understanding of him. What is also needed, and what they provide, is an understanding of his teachings and his mission in light of Israel’s Scriptures and in view of the sociopolitical situation of Palestine. Jesus came to redeem and renew Israel so that a transformed Israel would transform the world.
Acts. The book of Acts contains the story of the emergence of the early church from Jerusalem to Rome. Even though Acts is a repository of apostolic preaching and plots the beginnings of the Gentile mission, it is the sequel to Luke’s Gospel and is very much the story of Jesus in perfect tense (i.e., a past event with ongoing significance). The most succinct summary of the Christology of Acts is in Peter’s speech in Jerusalem, where he states that “this Jesus” whom they crucified has been made both “Lord and Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” by God (2:36). In the succeeding narratives emphasis is given to “Jesus is the Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” (e.g., 9:22; 17:3; 18:5), which is a message pertinent to Jews and Gentiles (20:21).
Paul’s Letters. The Pauline Epistles, although they are situational, pastoral, and not given primarily to christological exposition, still exhibit beliefs about Jesus held by Paul and his Christian contemporaries. The high points of Paul’s Christology can be detected in his use of traditional material such as Col. 1:15–20, which exposits the sufficiency and the supremacy of Christ. Philippians 2:5–11 narrates the story of the incarnation as an example of self-giving love. In 1 Cor. 8:6 Paul offers a Christianized version of the Shema of Deut. 6:4. There is a petition to Jesus as “Come, Lord!” in 1 Cor. 16:22. Paul can also refer to Jesus as God in Rom. 9:5 (although the grammar is ambiguous). For Paul, Jesus is both the “heavenly man” (1 Cor. 15:47–49) and the Son to come from heaven (1 Thess. 1:10). This interest in the divine Son of God does not mean that Paul was ignorant of or disinterested in the life and teachings of Jesus. Elsewhere he implies knowledge of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Rom. 14:14; 1 Cor. 7:10–11) and refers to the incarnation (e.g., 2 Cor. 8:9; Col. 2:9).
A number of titles are used to describe Jesus in Paul’s letters, including “Lord” and “Christ/Messiah” (and variations such as “Lord Jesus Christ” and “Christ Jesus”), “Savior,” and “Seed of David” (Rom. 1:3). But probably the most apt expression of Jesus’ nature according to Paul is “Son of God” (e.g., Rom. 1:4; 2 Cor. 1:19; Gal. 2:20). This language of sonship suggests that Jesus is the means of God’s salvation and glory and is the special agent through whom the Father acts. Referring to Jesus as “Son” also underscores Jesus’ unique relationship to God the Father and his unique role in executing the ordained plan of salvation for the elect.
We might also add that Paul provides the building blocks of what would later become a full-blown trinitarian theology, such as in the benediction of 2 Cor. 13:14 and in general exhortations about the gospel (1 Cor. 2:1–5). It must be emphasized that Paul’s Christology cannot be separated from his eschatology, soteriology, and ecclesiology. The sending of God’s Son (see Rom. 8:3; Gal. 4:4–5) into the world marks the coming of redemption and salvation through the cross and resurrection of the Son, and these are appropriated by faith. Those who believe become members of the restored Israel, the renewed Adamic race, and constituent members of the body of Christ. To that we might add the experiential element of Paul’s Christology as Jesus is known in the experience of salvation, prayer, and worship (e.g., Gal. 2:19–20).
The General Letters. The General Letters (also called the Catholic Epistles) provide a further array of images and explorations into the person and work of Jesus Christ and how they relate to the community of faith. The message of Hebrews is essentially “Jesus is better!” He is better than the angels and better than Moses; he is a better high priest; he offers a better sacrifice, establishes a better law, and instigates a better covenant. This letter is a sermonic exhortation against falling away from the faith (e.g., 2:1–4), and toward that end the author sets before his readers the magnificence of Jesus Christ, who is “the same yesterday and today and forever” (13:8).
James has little christological content and focuses instead on exhortations that bear remarkable resemblance to the teachings of Jesus from the Gospels. Even so, the letter makes passing reference to the “glorious Lord Jesus Christ” (2:1; cf. 1:1).
Central to 1 Peter is the glory and salvation that will be manifested at the revelation of Jesus Christ at his second coming (1:5, 7, 9, 13; 4:13; 5:1). Much attention is given to Jesus’ sacrificial death as a lamb (1:19), the example of his suffering (2:21–23; 4:1–2, 13), and the substitutionary nature of his death (2:24; 3:18). He is the Shepherd and Overseer of the souls of Christians (2:25). Peter writes this to encourage congregations in Asia Minor living under adverse conditions, and he sets before them the pattern of Jesus as a model for their own journey.
In 2 Peter we find a mix of Jewish eschatological concepts and Hellenistic religious language, with the author seeking to defend the apostolic gospel in a pagan culture. Jesus is the source of knowledge (1:2, 8; 2:20) and righteousness (1:1). Much emphasis is given to the coming kingdom of Jesus Christ (1:11, 16; 3:10). Jesus is the sustainer and renewer of the church and also the coming judge of the entire world.
Similar themes can be found in Jude, which is addressed to a group of believers who have been infiltrated by false teachers promoting licentiousness. Jude declares the infiltrators to be condemned and calls on the believers to hold fast to the faith. Jesus is the “Sovereign and Lord” (v. 4), Jesus saved people out of Egypt during the exodus (v. 5 [but see marginal notes on the variant reading “Lord”]), the second coming of Jesus will mark the revelation of his “mercy” (v. 21), and the benediction ascribes “glory, majesty, power and authority” to God through Jesus (v. 25). Most characteristic of all is the emphasis upon Jesus/God as the one who keeps the believers in the grip of his saving power (vv. 1, 21, 23).
The Letters of John take up where the Gospel of John left off, focusing on Jesus as the incarnate Word of God. The first of the three Johannine Epistles appears to have been written in a context where a community of Christians was being pressured by Jews to deny that Jesus is the Messiah (2:22) and also by dissident docetists to deny that Jesus had a physical body (4:2; 5:6). The major focus, however, is on Jesus as the Son of God (1:3, 7; 2:23; 3:8, 23; 4:9–10, 15; 5:11) and the incarnation of God’s very own truth and love (3:16; cf. 2 John 3).
Revelation. The Christology of the book of Revelation is best summed up in the opening description of Jesus as “him who is, and who was, and who is to come,” which underscores the lordship of Jesus over the past, present, and future. John then describes Jesus with the threefold titles “the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth” (1:4–5). In many ways, the story and Christology of Revelation are paradoxical. Jesus is both the victim of Roman violence and the victor over human evil. Jesus is the suffering “Lamb of God” and the powerful “Lion of the tribe of Judah.” In Rev. 4–5 we are given a picture of the worship in heaven and the enthronement of Jesus, and yet the realities on earth are a dearth of heavenly goodness, with persecution and apostasy rampant (Rev. 1–3). This tension continues until the final revelation of Jesus, when the heavenly Lord returns to bring the goodness and power of heaven to transform the perils of the earth and bring his people into the new Jerusalem.
Summary
The primary fixtures of a biblical Christology are (1) Jesus Christ is the promised deliverer intimated in Israel’s Scriptures, whose identity and mission are anticipated and illuminated by the law and the prophets; (2) the man Jesus of Nazareth is identified with the risen and exalted Lord Jesus Christ; and (3) Jesus participates in the very identity and being of God. See also Jesus Christ.
Hermeneutics is the science and practice of interpretation. It can refer more generally to the philosophy of human understanding, or more specifically to the tools and methods used for interpreting communicative acts.
Human communication takes place in a variety of ways: through the use of nonverbal signs, through speech, and through writing. Effective communication requires some degree of shared belief, knowledge, and background between the participants. If the communicators have a significant amount of common ground, they will be able to successfully understand one another with little extra effort. Conversely, individuals with vastly different backgrounds will need to take extra steps to communicate effectively, such as defining special terms, avoiding jargon and colloquialisms, appreciating details about the other’s cultural assumptions, or learning a foreign language.
The Bible is not exempt from this process of communication. The Scriptures are meant to be read, understood, and put into practice (Luke 8:4–15; James 1:18), a task that requires effort and study on the part of its readers (Acts 17:11; 2 Tim. 2:15). Everyone who reads the Bible is involved in this interpretative process, though readers will vary in their hermeneutical self-consciousness and skill. Thus, although readers are able to understand and appropriate much of the Bible without any special training in hermeneutical principles, such training is appropriate and helpful, both in attaining self-consciousness in interpretation and in acquiring new skills and insights in the effort to become a better reader.
The Development of Hermeneutics
The church has benefited from a long history of thinking about the nature and purpose of interpreting its Scriptures, and that reflection has resulted in a wide variety of hermeneutical theories and practices. How does one determine the meaning of a text? Is meaning the truth embedded within the passage? Or is it the original author’s intention in writing? Or does the text act independently of its author and history, either because it stands on its own terms or because it only “means” anything in interaction with readers? The answers to these questions will determine how readers approach a text, the questions they expect that text to answer, and the tools they use in interpretation.
From the early church to the Enlightenment. The early church emphasized the ability of the biblical text to convey heavenly truth, whether that truth was conceived as doctrinal teaching or absolute ethical rules. While the “literal meaning” of many texts could often supply simple truths and maxims, such a reading was at other times inadequate and could appear incompatible with what were considered basic and fundamental beliefs. Various allegorical techniques were therefore employed to explain such problematic texts. Interpreters often viewed the literal and historical features of the text as a starting point in the search for fuller meaning, as symbolic pointers to moral principles, absolute truths, or eternal realities. These practices were systematized throughout the Middle Ages and resulted in an extensive development of tradition. Church tradition, in turn, provided a degree of protection from the potential for arbitrariness in allegorical techniques, insisting that interpretation must be guided by the “rule of faith,” the traditional teaching and faith of the church.
Beginning in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, scholarship moved to distance itself from such tradition. The Protestant Reformers, dissatisfied with the rule of church tradition, sought to displace its authority with the direct rule of Scripture. They therefore returned to the original biblical text, engaging in critical study of the text itself and translating the Bible into the vernacular to make it more widely accessible. In the centuries that followed, Enlightenment scholars went a step further in their rejection of the church as the sole repository of knowledge. Instead, they asserted, knowledge was acquired through scientific inquiry and critical study. Such inquiry could be applied to any field: the forces of nature, human anatomy, or the interpretation of texts. The meaning of a text was not some abstract truth or heavenly principle; rather, meaning was determined by the human author’s original intention in writing and was therefore a historical matter. The intention of an author could be better exposed and understood through a more complete study of both the language in which a text was written and the historical circumstances that surrounded it. Many of these same emphases had been championed by the Protestant Reformers; yet the Enlightenment thinkers differed on one key point: the Reformers never questioned that the text was the word of God.
From the Enlightenment to the present. This favorable attitude toward historical research dwindled over the centuries. In its place authors emphasized the primacy of the text as text, apart from any connection to its origin and history. Literature, it is argued, ultimately operates independently from its author’s intention. All that matters is the text, and it is the reader’s job to understand the text on its own terms, apart from the contingencies surrounding its creation. To that end, interpreters should pay careful attention to the text’s literary features, including its plot structure, characterization, themes, and use of imagery. An interesting example of this hermeneutical dynamic is found in John 19:22, where Pilate asserts, “What I have written, I have written.” Pilate’s words quickly take on significance far beyond their author’s intention, primarily because they are juxtaposed with other themes in John, such as testimony and the kingship of Christ.
More recent approaches have emphasized the role of the reader in the construction of meaning. Interpretation, it is argued, is determined by the interaction between reader and text; readers bring their own presuppositions to the task of interpretation, and such assumptions determine meaning. The author and the historical context of the text will exert some influence, but the primary determinant of meaning is the present reader in his or her present environment. This is not to say that the text “means” whatever a reader wants it to mean; rather, it makes meaning contingent upon the contemporary environment and not subject to anything external to individual readers. On the one hand, readers must“actualize” the text by applying and appropriating it within an environment alien to the original. On the other, readers have the right, and in some cases the responsibility, of undermining the text, particularly if that text assists in the oppression of others.
Elements of an Effective Hermeneutic
An effective hermeneutic requires keeping each of these elements in constant balance with one another. God’s word is truthful and fully trustworthy, yet it is given to his people through individual human authors, authors who wrote in a particular context to a particular audience at a particular time. Understanding the Bible therefore requires knowledge of the purposes of these authors in their specific historical contexts. Nevertheless, our primary access to authorial intention is through the biblical text itself. Finally, understanding always requires personal interaction with, and application of, the text of Scripture to each person’s own life and circumstances. Thus, hermeneutics involves the simultaneous interaction of a variety of perspectives—truth, author, text, and reader—each of which cannot function properly without the others. What follows here is an outline of the most important hermeneutical tools required for such a weighty endeavor.
Linguistics
An appreciation of the nature, structure, and function of language is fundamental to any interpretative endeavor. Obviously, this applies first of all to the specific languages in which the books of the Bible were originally composed. Each language has its own unique vocabulary, grammar, and syntax, and structures available to a writer in one language often are absent in another. Thus, while it is often necessary and acceptable to rely on translations (Neh. 7:73–8:12), readers should be aware that translation itself involves a degree of unavoidable interpretation.
A more general analysis of language is also useful. Understanding the typical patterns by which authors will string sentences together is necessary for following a writing’s train of thought. This tool, called “discourse analysis,” operates above the sentence level, attempting to understand and explain how sentences function in conjunction with one another in order to produce meaningful paragraphs, and how those paragraphs in turn operate within the overarching purpose of the discourse. These patterns of discourse can vary on the basis of book, author, language, culture, and literary genre, but there are also features of effective discourse common to all communication. Thus, while the principles and rules of communication are often intuitively grasped, understanding language, both generally and specifically, is foundational to the task of interpretation.
Literature and Literary Theory
The biblical writers are concerned not only with the informational content of their writing, but also with the manner in which that content is communicated. The words, patterns of speech, style, and imagery of any text provide significant insight into its purpose and message, apart from that text’s specific propositional content. The diversity of language used in the Gospels provides an example of this. Each of the four Gospel authors has a slightly different concern in his writing. John’s purpose, “that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31), explains his frequent use of courtroom language, such as “testimony” and “witness” (e.g., John 21:24). Mark, by contrast, sweeps the reader along a fast-paced and intensely personal exposition of Jesus’ life and death through the terseness and immediacy of his narration. Attention to these literary details allows the reader to more fully participate in the world of the text.
Such decisions will often depend upon a thorough analysis of genre. A reader naturally interprets historical narrative differently from poetry and didactic material. Furthermore, the conventions of different genres change over time. The book of Acts, for example, despite its essentially historical character, does not appear concerned with recording an exact dictation of the many speeches it reports, despite modern expectations that historical writing should be as precise as possible. The classification of ancient genres and the description of their respective conventions therefore require a good deal of analysis and sensitivity, but often such insights are provided by a careful and open reading of the text.
History
As the product of a particular author at a particular time, each book of the Bible is situated within its own unique historical context. Paul, for example, while perhaps conscious of the importance of his letters for posterity, wrote to specific churches or individuals with a singular purpose. This particularity of author, audience, and circumstance can often cause interpretative problems. Thus, while background studies are not always necessary to get the general idea of the author’s message, they can be invaluable in protecting readers from anachronism and enabling them to better appreciate the author’s purpose and perspective.
Historical study is assisted by specialized disciplines. Archaeology, for example, focuses on the beliefs, habits, practices, and history of ancient cultures, harnessing a wealth of evidence to that end. Similarly, anthropology and other social sciences are able to explore facets of modern cultures in order to better assess cross-cultural presuppositions and behaviors, many of which provide insight into ancient civilizations that shared similar attitudes. These methods provide the reader with the information necessary to understand a text in terms consistent with its cultural backdrop, highlighting both the similarities and the differences between the Bible and its environment. Recent discoveries of ancient Hittite treaties, for example, shed light on the “cutting ceremony” recorded in Gen. 15. These treaties detail similar ceremonies in which the vassal of a king would walk between hewed animal carcasses as a symbol of allegiance; if disobedience occurred, the vassal would share the fate of the animals. A similar ceremony occurs in Genesis, but with an interesting twist at the end: God, not Abram, passes through the pieces (15:17).
Humility and the Attitude of the Reader
Careful attention in interpretation requires a great deal of humility. It is difficult to overstate the importance of the attitude of the reader for an effective hermeneutic. Being a good reader requires willingness to share and participate in the world of the author and the text, a willingness that postpones judgment and expects personal change. This, in turn, requires a spirit of self-criticism, a commitment to defer one’s own presuppositions in favor of those of the text. Although readers are never able to fully distance themselves from their cultural situation and assumptions, the study of hermeneutics, among other things, can provide tools and skills for self-criticism and self-awareness, skills that enable the reader to better understand, appreciate, and appropriate the meaning of a text. Even a peripheral understanding of the complexities of interpretation can help readers develop an attitude of humility, imagination, and expectation as they approach the Scriptures.
Such humility is a prerequisite for application. The depth of meaning embedded in any text, and especially within the Bible, provides the humble reader with a rich and powerful tool for personal growth. Having better understood the world of the text on its own terms, readers are able to “project” that world onto themselves and their environment, to appropriate its meaning in a new and possibly foreign context. Thus, Jesus promises that those who hear, understand, and put his word into practice will yield a crop “some thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times what was sown” (Mark 4:20).
Unique Features of Biblical Interpretation
Certain unique features of the biblical text can create special opportunities and challenges for the Christian interpreter. These challenges are at work in the Bible’s own interpretation of itself. The Bible was written by many different authors over the course of a long period of history; it is therefore not surprising to find later authors reflecting on earlier periods. This innerbiblical interpretation offers the Christian insights into the unique nature of biblical hermeneutics and therefore provides a foundational model in approaching the Bible as the word of God.
The common and preeminent assumption that grounds innerbiblical interpretation is the commitment to ultimate divine authorship. Thus, the writer of Hebrews, though affirming the diversity of human authorship in the Bible (1:1), regularly introduces OT quotations with statements such as “God says” (1:5), “he spoke through David” (4:7), and “the Holy Spirit says” (3:7). Other writers tend to prefer the formula “it is written,” but each of these reflects a common presupposition that the Scriptures are ultimately delivered by God (2 Pet. 1:21).
Divine authorship means, at the very least, that there is a depth of meaning and purpose to the text, a depth often hidden even from the human author (1 Pet. 1:10–12). Psalm 2, for example, probably originally served as a coronation hymn used to celebrate the appointment of a new king in Israel. Yet the NT understands this psalm as a prophecy fulfilled in the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:33; Heb. 5:5). The intention of the original speaker can even be at odds with God’s intention, such as when Caiaphas claims, “It is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish” (John 11:50; cf. Acts 5:35–39). In this case, the irony of Caiaphas’s statement creates a powerful testimony, contrary to his intent, and is used by John to promote confidence in Jesus.
Furthermore, because the Scriptures are from God, they have a consistent and central focus. The NT unhesitatingly views all of Scripture, in all its diversity, as focused, by virtue of divine inspiration, on the person and work of Jesus Christ. This is seen in, for example, Luke 24:13–35, where the resurrected Jesus, “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” explains to his disciples “what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself” (cf. John 5:39; 12:41). This central focus on Christ requires the Christian interpreter to understand any individual verse in light of its context within the canon, to operate with the same assumption as the NT apostles, that all the Scriptures are concerned with testifying to Jesus the Christ.
Additionally, Paul views both Testaments as the special possession and once-for-all foundation of God’s church (Eph. 2:19–20; cf. Acts 2:42). The church, from a NT perspective, is the primary audience of the entirety of Scripture (1 Pet. 1:12) and is therefore uniquely entrusted with understanding and proclaiming its message (Matt. 28:18–20). While the Scriptures themselves are the only infallible guide for interpretation, believers should not forsake the teaching and tradition of the church (2 Thess. 2:15).
Finally, full understanding of the Bible requires the work of the Holy Spirit in conjunction with the faith of the reader. Belief and understanding go together (John 10:38), and both are the result of the unique work of the Holy Spirit (16:13). The proof that such understanding has taken place is the godly life of the believer (Rom. 2:13; James 1:22–25). The reverse is also true: disobedience works against understanding the riches of God’s Word (James 1:21). Such considerations underline the importance of the hermeneutical task. The tools and principles of hermeneutics are valuable only insofar as they enable the reader to better understand and appropriate the biblical message, to hear the word of God and respond appropriately.
Generally speaking, in Scripture the word “fool” is used to describe someone in a morally deprived state. It does not, as in contemporary American usage, refer to a person’s lack of intellectual ability or to one whose actions convey those of a buffoon. Terms for “fool” appear all through Scripture, but wisdom literature contains the highest concentration. Proverbs uses over half a dozen words to describe the fool. All of them indicate some kind of moral breach and fall on a scale from the most morally hardened to the naive.
Obstinacy, recalcitrance, and closed-mindedness characterize the morally dense fool. Such individuals have no use for advice from others because they are “wise in their own eyes” (Prov. 3:7; cf. 12:15; 16:2). Fools frequently scoff at correction and rebuke (9:7–8, 12; 13:1; 14:6; 15:12; 19:25; 20:1; 21:11, 24; 22:10; 24:9). They manifest arrogance (21:24). Fools do not learn from their own mistakes or those of others but instead often repeat them (26:11). One of the main problems is that fools “lack sense,” which ultimately implies that they lack character (see 6:32; 7:7; 9:4, 16; 10:13, 21; 11:12; 12:11; 15:21; 17:18; 24:30). Such a person consistently makes poor decisions and loses the appetite and passion necessary for acquiring wisdom.
According to the book of Proverbs, three qualities make up the essential nature of the fool. First, the fool is unwilling to learn by means of discipline (3:11–12; 17:10), or formal instruction (17:16), or a word of advice (12:15), or personal experience (26:11). Second, the fool lacks self-control. Both the speech (15:2) and the behavior (14:16) of fools demonstrate a lack of restraint. They take the path of least resistance to easy money (1:8–19) and easy sex (7:6–27). Third, the fool is the one who rejects the fear of the Lord (1:7).
All half a dozen terms used for “fool” indicate, to one degree or another, a moral breach. The one exception is peti, the word used to indicate the “simple” (e.g., Prov. 1:4; 19:25; 21:11). This word is at the other end of the moral spectrum from “fool” and refers to one who is young, vulnerable, and inexperienced. The simple are the gullible, impressionable persons. These individuals can be influenced for either good or ill, depending on whom they listen to. Both Woman Wisdom and Woman Folly make compelling calls to the simple (Prov. 9:6, 16). This simple youth will make moral mistakes along the way, but the peti has yet to harden into a full-fledged fool, one who is incorrigible and unteachable.
In the NT, the fool is the one who does not trust in God or in the power that God displays through the resurrection of Christ (Luke 24:25; Rom. 1:22; 1Cor. 15:36). Jesus makes references to the fool when he tells the stories of the wise and foolish builders (Matt. 7:24–27) and the wise and foolish maidens (Matt. 25:1–13). Paul uses the term “foolish” to rebuke the Galatians for their refusal to accept the gospel (Gal. 3:1). However, in his correspondence with the church in Corinth, Paul reverses the conventional understanding of folly and uses it as a rhetorical strategy to communicate his message. He speaks of the message of the cross as foolishness to the world (1Cor. 1:18). On another occasion, in order to argue against the arrogance of his opponents, Paul engages in “a little foolishness” (2Cor. 11:1) as he boasts about his ministry, which is riddled with failure (2Cor. 11–12).
In the Bible, gestures are made with either parts of the bodyor items, such as clothing and rings, directly connected to the body.For this reason, it makes sense to classify biblical gestures inrelation to the different body parts that are identified with thegestures. It is, however, challenging to know where to draw a line onclassifying a gesture. For example, a devious person is described inProv. 6:13 as one “who winks maliciously with his eye, signalswith his feet and motions with his fingers.” It is unclearwhether this is a single gesture or multiple ones, and whether allsignify different things or the same thing.
Head
Gesturesthat relate to the head range from simple head motions to semiviolentacts such as hair pulling. Simple head motions include lifting ofone’s head in honor (Gen. 40:13), bowing one’s head inmourning (Ps. 35:14), tossing one’s head in mockery andderision (2Kings 19:21), and shaking one’s head as insult(Ps. 22:7; Mark 15:29).
Acommon action is the shaving of the head, which can be forpurification (Lev. 14:8–9; Num. 6:9; 8:7 [includes all bodyhair]), mourning (Deut. 21:11–13; Job 1:20; Isa. 15:2; Jer.16:6; 47:5; 48:37; Ezek. 27:31; Amos 8:10; Mic. 1:16), remorse (Jer.41:5), or shaming (Jer. 2:16). However, priests are forbidden fromshaving their heads even in mourning (Lev. 21:5; Ezek. 44:20), whilethe high priest is to wear a turban on his head during sacrificialduties (Exod. 29:6).
Anointingof the head is done when a priest or king is installed (Exod. 29:7;Ps. 23:5) or simply as a sign of God’s goodness and blessing ona person (Eccles. 9:8). Blessing may also involve placing a hand onthe head of the person being blessed (Gen. 48:14–18; Exod.29:19), while the same gesture on the head of sacrificial animals isa symbolic means of transferring sin (Lev. 3:2, 8, 13; 4:4, 15, 24,29, 33; 8:18, 22).
Inthe OT, a woman’s head can be shaved in mourning (Deut.21:12–13; cf. Jer. 47:5), but in the NT, a shaved head can be acause for disgrace (1Cor. 11:5–6).
Face.Facial gestures range from expressions to actions such as touching orcovering the face. A face can be downcast in anger (Gen. 4:5–6)or bowed to the ground in honor (Gen. 48:12), in dejection (Josh.7:6), in humility (Ruth 2:10), in worship (2Chron. 20:18; Ps.138:2), in subjection, supplication, reverence (1Sam. 20:41;25:41; 28:14; 2Sam. 14:4, 22; 18:28; 24:20; 1Kings 1:23;1Chron. 21:20), or in dread (e.g., Moses before Yahweh [Exod.3:6]).
Theface can be covered or veiled as an indication of uncleanness (Lev.13:45), in grief/mourning (2Sam. 19:4; Ezek. 24:17), inresignation (1Kings 19:13), with intent to deceive in adultery(Job 24:15), or in horror of judgment (Esther 7:8; Ezek. 12:6, 12).It can also be buried in the dust in remorse (Lam. 3:29).
Godcan be described as hiding or turning away his face againstwickedness and evil (Deut. 31:18; 32:20; Ps. 34:16; Isa. 8:17; Jer.33:5; Ezek. 7:22; 15:7; 20:46; 21:2) or in an act of withholdingblessings (Job 13:15; Pss. 10:1; 13:1; 27:9; 30:7; 34:16; Isa. 54:8;59:2; 64:7). God can also turn his face toward a place in judgment(Ezek. 4:3, 7; 6:2). In 1Sam. 5:3–4 the idol of thePhilistine god Dagon falls facedown before the ark of the covenant,apparently overpowered by Yahweh.
Actsof humiliation or dishonor can involve spitting in the face (Num.12:14; Deut. 25:9; Job 17:6; 30:10; Isa. 50:6), slapping the face(1Kings 22:24; 2Chron. 18:23; Job 16:10; Lam. 3:30; Mic.5:1), pulling a skirt up over someone’s face in shamingjudgment (Jer. 13:26; Nah. 3:5), and hooking and dragging someone bythe nose (2Kings 19:28). Although being struck on the cheek ishumiliating, Jesus instructs his disciples to “turn the othercheek” as a sign of resistance to violence (Matt. 5:39; Luke6:29).
Onecan lift one’s face in worship (2Kings 20:2; Job 22:26;Isa. 38:2) or in confidence (Job 11:15) and can fail to lift it inshame and disgrace (Ezra 9:6). Although the shaving of beards inmourning is common practice (Ezra 9:3; Isa. 15:2; Jer. 41:5; 48:37),the forced shaving of beards is an act of shaming and insulting(2Sam. 10:4; 1Chron. 19:4–5; Isa. 7:20; 50:6).
Eyes.Winking the eye is perceived as an evil, deceptive, or malicious act(Ps. 35:19; Prov. 6:13; 16:30). Eyes can be lifted up in worship andexpectation (Pss. 121:1; 123:1).
Mouth.Pursed lips can characterize an evil person (Prov. 16:30), while ahand can be clapped over the mouth in awe and submission (Job 21:5;40:4). Psalm 72:9 looks to the righteous king before whom the deserttribes will bow and whose “enemies lick the dust” indefeat.
Ears.An Israelite slave for life is to have a hole punched through his orher earlobe, held against a doorpost, with an awl (Exod. 21:6; Deut.15:17). Blood is sprinkled on the lobe of the right ear forpurification (Exod. 29:20; Lev. 8:23–24; 14:17), whilesupplication can be described as asking for the turning of an ear(2Kings 19:16; Ps. 31:2). Turning one’s ear signifiespaying attention or taking something to heart (Ps. 49:4; Prov. 4:20;5:13).
Neck.The neck can be adorned (Song 1:10) as a sign of pride and honor(Gen. 41:42; Judg. 5:30; Prov. 1:9; Ezek. 16:11) or outstretched inarrogance (Ps. 75:5 TNIV: “Do not lift your horns againstheaven; do not speak with outstretched neck”). Jeremiah put ayoke on his neck as a prophetic sign of the approaching Babylonianconquest (Jer. 27–28). While putting someone’s neck in ayoke is an act of triumphal conquest (Ps. 105:18), stepping on theneck of a subdued enemy is an act of subjugation and humiliation(Josh. 10:24).
Body
Nakednessin public is considered shameful (Gen. 9:22–23; Nah. 3:5; Rev.3:18), so that it is sometimes pictured as part of divine judgment(Deut. 28:48; Isa. 47:2–3; Lam. 1:8; Mic. 1:11) or as a sign ofpromiscuity (Isa. 57:8; Ezek. 16:36). An unkempt body can be a signof mourning, as it is for Mephibosheth (2Sam. 19:24). A certainkind of body covering is a sign of marriage proposal or protection(Ezek. 16:8; 23:18; Hos. 2:9). Body dismembering, even in war, is anact of humiliation (2Sam. 4:12).
Chest.In self-mortification, one can pound one’s chest in mourning(Ezek. 21:12) or in remorse (Jer. 31:19; Luke 18:13). The breasts ofsacrificial animals are waved before God as a “wave offering”before being eaten (Exod. 29:26; Lev. 7:30; Num. 6:20).
Hand,arm.Hand gestures include motions such as lifting hands in worship,clapping hands in joy, and clapping a hand over one’s mouth inawe. The expression “outstretched arm” (Exod. 6:6; Deut.4:34; 5:15; 7:19; 9:29; 11:2; 26:8; 1Kings 8:42; 2Kings17:36; 2Chron. 6:32; Ps. 136:12; Jer. 21:5; 27:5; 32:17, 21;Ezek. 20:33–34) indicates power, might, strength. It is oftenused of God to indicate his ability to defeat powerful armies andenemies. God is implored by the psalmist to lift his hand and act forthe sake of the righteous (Ps. 10:12).
Sincethe right hand is the hand of power, the act of sitting at the righthand indicates being favored (1Kings 2:19; Ps. 110:1; Matt.22:44; Mark 12:36; Luke 20:43; Acts 2:35; Heb. 1:3; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2;1Pet. 3:22). When taking an oath, one places a hand under thethigh/crotch (Gen. 24:2; 47:29), most likely the right hand (see Gen.48:14, 17–18; Lev. 8:23; 14:14).
Clappingthe hands can be a sign of awe (Ezek. 6:11), malice, or remorse(25:6), while a bared arm can be a sign of judgment (4:7). Job clapshis hand over his mouth in awe of God and in submission andrepentance (Job 40:4–5).
Handscan be lifted in worship (1Kings 8:22; 1Tim. 2:8), tobeseech (Ps. 28:2), to protect and bless (Ps. 10:12), in an oath(Deut. 32:40), or to harm (Exod. 24:11; 1Sam. 24:6, 10;2Sam.1:14; 18:12).
Pilatewashes his hands to proclaim his innocence over the death of Jesus(Matt. 27:24), while 1Pet. 5:6 urges believers to humblethemselves “under God’s mighty hand,” so that indue time they will be lifted up.
Buttocks.Exposure of the buttocks can serve as a humiliating insult andprovocation, as happens to David’s men (2Sam. 10:4;1Chron. 19:4) and Egyptian and Cushite captives (Isa. 20:4).
Leg.The leg or thigh is often a euphemism for the male reproductiveorgans, so that putting one’s hand under a thigh in oath (Gen.24:2; 47:29) may involve actually grabbing the genitalia. Animalthighs are waved to God in offering before being consumed (Lev. 9:21;10:14; Num. 6:20), while oaths administered to uncover adultery causea guilty woman’s thighs to waste (Num. 5:2–27).
Themost common gesture involving the knee is bowing, in worship orreverence (Deut. 33:3; Isa. 45:23; Rom. 11:4; 14:11; Phil. 2:10), indefeat (2Sam. 22:40; Ps. 18:38; Isa. 60:14), in distress (Ps.57:6), or in respect (1Kings 1:31). In what seems to be asomewhat awkward position, Elijah puts his face between his knees inprayer (1Kings 18:42).
Feet.Gestures involving the feet are probably the most common gestures inthe Bible. Feet can be washed in hospitality (Gen. 18:4; 19:2; 24:32;43:24; 1Sam. 25:41), in ablution (Exod. 30:19, 21; 40:31), orin supplication (1Sam. 25:41). Feet can be bathed in oil as ablessing (Deut. 33:24), uncovered in marriage proposals (Ezek. 16:8;cf. Ruth 3:4, 7), and stamped in remorse (Ezek. 25:6), and sandalscan be removed from them in honor (Exod. 3:1–10) or disgrace(Deut. 25:9). The heavenly seraphs cover their feet in supplicationbefore the throne of God (Isa. 6:2), while the feet of humans cansignal deception (Prov. 6:13).
Enemiescan be placed under one’s feet in subjugation (1Kings5:3; Pss. 8:6; 18:39; 45:5; 47:3; 110:1; Mal. 4:3; Rom. 16:20), havetheir feet shackled or ensnared (Job 13:27; 33:11; Pss. 25:15;105:18), and be forced to lick the feet of victors in humiliation anddefeat (Isa. 49:23). The righteous will bathe their feet in the bloodof their enemies in revenge (Pss. 58:10; 68:23).
Thoseoverwhelmed can grovel at the feet of the powerful (2Kings4:27, 37; Esther 8:3; Matt. 28:9; Mark 5:33; 7:25; Acts 10:25), whilethose emboldened can rise to their feet in confidence (Ezek. 2:1–2;3:24; Dan. 8:18).
Inthe NT, dust can be shaken off one’s feet as an indication ofdivine judgment (Matt. 10:14; Mark 6:11; Luke 9:5), even as lying ata person’s feet is a recognition of authority/submission (Matt.15:30; Mark 5:33; Luke 8:28, 35, 41, 47; 10:39; 17:16; Acts 4:37;5:2). A woman publicly washes Jesus’ feet with her tears, wipesthem with her hair, and kisses and perfumes them in what seems an actof love and repentance; but Jesus indicates that she has prepared hisbody for burial (Luke 7:38–46; John 11:2; 12:3). Jesus washeshis disciples’ feet as instruction on servanthood anddiscipleship (John 13:5–14).
Fingers,Toes.Different fingers seem to have different roles assigned them. Afinger sprinkles blood in cleansing (Lev. 4:6, 17, 25, 30, 34; 8:15;9:9; 14:16; 16:14, 19; Num. 19:4), while blood on the tip of theright thumb and on the right big toe is for cleansing (Exod. 29:20;Lev. 8:23–24; 14:17, 25, 28).
Onewears a signet ring as a sign of power (Esther 3:10) or a gesture ofrestoration and forgiveness (Luke 15:22). But fingers can also motionin deception (Prov. 6:13) or point in blame (Isa. 58:9). Jesus writeswith his finger on the ground, apparently as a gesture ofindifference to those pointing accusing fingers (John 8:6).
Clothesand Shoes
Garments.Garments attain significance as they are related to specificemotions. Wearing sackcloth and ashes in mourning is common (Gen.37:34; Ezek. 7:18; 2Sam. 3:31), while ripping garments inmourning is also frequently attested (Gen. 37:34; 44:13; Lev. 10:6;21:10; Josh. 7:6; 2Sam. 1:11; 3:31; 13:31; 1Kings 21:27;2Kings 2:12; 19:1; Esther 4:1; Isa. 32:11; 37:1; Jer. 41:5).
Rippingsomeone’s clothing to expose nakedness (Ezek. 16:39; 2Sam.10:4) or pulling a person’s skirts up over the face (Jer.13:26) is an act of shaming or insulting. But tearing one’sclothes off can be a sign of fury (Matt. 26:65). Persons withdefiling diseases are expected to warn off others by wearing tornclothes and shouting, “Unclean! Unclean!” (Lev. 13:45).
Bylaying their clothes at Saul’s feet, the crowd may beacknowledging his authority in the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58).
Sandals.A woman can remove a man’s sandal in contempt (Deut. 25:5–10),while a sandal can be removed by a kinsman-redeemer to indicategiving up a right or as a transfer of property (Ruth 4:7–8). Asandal can also be removed in mourning (Ezek. 24:17) or be cast overa piece of land to claim ownership (Pss. 60:8; 108:9).
PropheticGestures
Propheticgestures in the OT are mostly concerned with the call to repentanceand approaching judgments upon failure to heed the warning. Jeremiahputs a yoke on his neck (Jer. 27–28; cf. Deut. 28:48), Ezekielcooks with dung (Ezek. 4:12) and sleeps on his left side for 390 daysand then on his right side for 40 days (4:5–6), Isaiah stripsoff his clothing (Isa. 20:2–3; 32:11), and Hosea marries anunfaithful wife (Hos. 1:1–3).
Inthe NT, Jesus cleanses the temple as an act of symbolic judgment(Matt. 21:12; Mark 11:15; John 2:15). He also breaks bread and drinkswine (Matt. 26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19; 24:30, 35; Acts 2:46;20:11; 27:35; 1Cor. 11:24–25) and washes his disciples’feet (John 13:1–13), thereby establishing symbolic Christianpractices.
It is difficult to imagine a world without consistentmetrological systems. Society’s basic structures, from economyto law, require a uniform and accurate method for measuring time,distances, weights, volumes, and so on. In today’s world,technological advancements allow people to measure various aspects ofthe universe with incredible accuracy—from nanometers tolight-years, milligrams to kilograms.
Themetrological systems employed in biblical times span the sameconcepts as our own modern-day systems: weight, linear distance, andvolume or capacity. However, the systems of weights and measurementsemployed during the span of biblical times were not nearly asaccurate or uniform as the modern units employed today. Preexistingweight and measurement systems existed in the contextual surroundingsof both the OT and the NT authors and thus heavily influenced thesystems employed by the Israelite nation as well as the NT writers.There was great variance between the different standards usedmerchant to merchant (Gen. 23:16), city to city, region to region,time period to time period, even despite the commands to use honestscales and honest weights (Lev. 19:35–36; Deut. 25:13–15;Prov. 11:1; 16:11; 20:23; Ezek. 45:10).
Furthermore,inconsistencies and contradictions exist within the written recordsas well as between archaeological specimens. In addition, significantdifferences are found between preexilic and postexilic measurementsin the biblical texts, and an attempt at merging dry capacity andliquid volume measurements further complicated the issue. This is tobe expected, especially when we consider modern-dayinconsistencies—for example, 1 US liquid pint= 0.473liters, while 1 US dry pint= 0.550 liters. Thus, all modernequivalents given below are approximations, and even the bestestimates have a margin of error of + 5percent or more.
Weights
Weightsin biblical times were carried in a bag or a satchel (Deut. 25:13;Prov. 16:11; Mic. 6:11) and were stones, usually carved into variousanimal shapes for easy identification. Their side or flat bottom wasinscribed with the associated weight and unit of measurement.Thousands of historical artifacts, which differ by significantamounts, have been discovered by archaeologists and thus have greatlycomplicated the work of determining accurate modern-day equivalents.
Beka.Approximately 1⁄5 ounce, or 5.6 grams. Equivalent to 10 gerahsor ½ the sanctuary shekel (Exod. 38:26). Used to measuremetals and goods such as gold (Gen. 24:22).
Gerah.1⁄50 ounce, or 0.56 grams. Equivalent to 1⁄10 beka, 1⁄20shekel (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25).
Litra.Approximately 12 ounces, or 340 grams. A Roman measure of weight.Used only twice in the NT (John 12:3; 19:39). The precursor to themodern British pound.
Mina.Approximately 1¼ pounds, or 0.56 kilograms. Equivalent to 50shekels. Used to weigh gold (1Kings 10:17; Ezra 2:69), silver(Neh. 7:71–72), and other goods. The prophet Ezekiel redefinedthe proper weight: “Theshekel is to consist of twentygerahs. Twenty shekels plus twenty-five shekels plus fifteen shekelsequal one mina” (Ezek. 45:12). Before this redefinition, therewere arguably 50 shekels per mina. In Jesus’ parable of theservants, he describes the master entrusting to his three servantsvarying amounts—10 minas, 5 minas, 1 mina—implying amonetary value (Luke 19:11–24), probably of either silver orgold. One mina was equivalent to approximately three months’wages for a laborer.
Pim.Approximately 1⁄3 ounce, or 9.3 grams. Equivalent to 2⁄3shekel. Referenced only once in the Scriptures (1Sam. 13:21).
Shekel.Approximately 2⁄5 ounce, or 11 grams. Equivalent toapproximately 2 bekas. The shekel is the basic unit of weightmeasurement in Israelite history, though its actual weight variedsignificantly at different historical points. Examples include the“royal shekel” (2Sam. 14:26), the “commonshekel” (2Kings 7:1), and the “sanctuary shekel,”which was equivalent to 20 gerahs (e.g., Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25;Num. 3:47). Because it was used to weigh out silver or gold, theshekel also functioned as a common monetary unit in the NT world.
Talent.Approximately 75 pounds, or 34 kilograms. Equivalent to approximately60 minas. Various metals were weighed using talents: gold (Exod.25:39; 37:24; 1Chron. 20:2), silver (Exod. 38:27; 1Kings20:39; 2Kings 5:22), and bronze (Exod. 38:29). This probably isderived from the weight of a load that a man could carry.
Table12. Biblical Weights and Measures and Their Modern Equivalents:
Weights
Beka– 10 geraahs; ½ shekel = 1/5 ounce = 5.6 grams
Gerah– 1/10 beka; 1/20 shekel = 1/50 ounce = 0.56 grams
Litra– 12 ounces = 340 grams
Mina– 50 shekels = 1 ¼ pounds = 0.56 kilograms
Pim– 2/3 shekel = 1/3 ounce = 9.3 grams
Shekel– 2 bekas; 20 gerahs = 2/5 ounce = 11 grams
Talent– 60 minas = 75 pounds = 34 kilograms
Linearmeasurements
Cubit– 6 handbreadths = 18 inches = 45.7 centimeters
Day’sjourney = 20-25 miles = 32-40 kilometerse
Fingerbreadth– ¼ handbreadth = ¾ inch = 1.9 centimeterse
Handbreadth– 1/6 cubit = 3 inches = 7.6 centimeters
Milion– 1 mile = 1.6 kilometers
Orguia– 1/100 stadion = 5 feet 11 inches = 1.8 meters
Reed/rod– 108 inches = 274 centimeters
Sabbathday’s journey – 2,000 cubits = ¾ mile = 1.2kilometers
Span– 3 handbreadths = 9 inches = 22.8 centimeters
Stadion– 100 orguiai = 607 feet = 185 meters
Capacity
Cab– 1 omer = ½ gallon = 1.9 liters
Choinix– ¼ gallon = 0.9 liters
Cor– 1 homer; 10 ephahs = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Ephah– 10 omers; 1/10 homer = 3/5 bushel; 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Homer– 10 ephahs; 1 cor = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Koros– 10 bushels; 95 gallons – 360 liters
Omer– 1/10 ephah; 1/100 homer = 2 quarts = 1.9 liters
Saton– 1 seah = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
Seah– 1/3 ephah; 1 saton = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
LiquidVolume
Bath– 1 ephah = 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Batos– 8 gallons = 30.3 liters
Hin– 1/6 bath; 12 logs = 1 gallon; 4 quarts = 3.8 liters
Log– 1/72 bath; 1/12 hin = 1/3 quart = 0.3 liters
Metretes– 10 gallons = 37.8 literes
LinearMeasurements
Linearmeasurements were based upon readily available natural measurementssuch as the distance between the elbow and the hand or between thethumb and the little finger. While convenient, this method ofmeasurement gave rise to significant inconsistencies.
Cubit.Approximately 18 inches, or 45.7 centimeters. Equivalent to 6handbreadths. The standard biblical measure of linear distance, asthe shekel is the standard measurement of weight. The distance fromthe elbow to the outstretched fingertip. Used to describe height,width, length (Exod. 25:10), distance (John 21:8), and depth (Gen.7:20). Use of the cubit is ancient. For simple and approximateconversion into modern units, divide the number of cubits in half formeters, then multiply the number of meters by 3 to arrive at feet.
1cubit = 2 spans = 6 handbreadths = 24 fingerbreadths
Day’sjourney.An approximate measure of distance equivalent to about 20–25miles, or 32–40 kilometers. Several passages reference a singleor multiple days’ journey as a description of the distancetraveled or the distance between two points: “a day’sjourney” (Num. 11:31; 1Kings 19:4), “a three-dayjourney” (Gen. 30:36; Exod. 3:18; 8:27; Jon. 3:3), “sevendays” (Gen. 31:23), and “eleven days” (Deut. 1:2).After visiting Jerusalem for Passover, Jesus’ parents journeyedfor a day (Luke 2:44) before realizing that he was not with them.
Fingerbreadth.The width of the finger, or ¼ of a handbreadth, approximately¾ inch, or 1.9 centimeters. The fingerbreadth was thebeginning building block of the biblical metrological system forlinear measurements. Used only once in the Scriptures, to describethe bronze pillars (Jer. 52:21).
Handbreadth.Approximately 3 inches, or 7.6 centimeters. Equivalent to 1/6 cubit,or four fingerbreadths. Probably the width at the base of the fourfingers. A short measure of length, thus compared to a human’sbrief life (Ps. 39:5). Also the width of the rim on the bread table(Exod. 25:25) and the thickness of the bronze Sea (1Kings7:26).
Milion.Translated “mile” in Matt. 5:41. Greek transliteration ofRoman measurement mille passuum, “a thousand paces.”
Orguia.Approximately 5 feet 11 inches, or 1.8 meters. Also translated as“fathom.” A Greek unit of measurement. Probably thedistance between outstretched fingertip to fingertip. Used to measurethe depth of water (Acts 27:28).
Reed/rod.Approximately 108 inches, or 274 centimeters. This is also a generalterm for a measuring device rather than a specific linear distance(Ezek. 40:3, 5; 42:16–19; Rev. 11:1; 21:15).
Sabbathday’s journey.Approximately ¾ mile, or 1.2 kilometers (Acts 1:12). About2,000 cubits.
Span.Approximately 9 inches, or 22.8 centimeters. Equivalent to threehandbreadths, and ½ cubit. The distance from outstretchedthumb tip to little-finger tip. The length and width of the priest’sbreastpiece (Exod. 28:16).
Stadion.Approximately 607 feet, or 185 meters. Equivalent to 100 orguiai.Used in the measurement of large distances (Matt. 14:24; Luke 24:13;John 6:19; 11:18; Rev. 14:20; 21:16).
LandArea
Seed.The size of a piece of land could also be measured on the basis ofhow much seed was required to plant that field (Lev. 27:16; 1Kings18:32).
Yoke.Fields and lands were measured using logical, available means. Inbiblical times, this meant the amount of land a pair of yoked animalscould plow in one day (1Sam. 14:14; Isa. 5:10).
Capacity
Cab.Approximately ½ gallon, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1 omer.Mentioned only once in the Scriptures, during the siege of Samaria(2Kings 6:25).
Choinix.Approximately ¼ gallon, or 0.9 liters. A Greek measurement,mentioned only once in Scripture (Rev. 6:6).
Cor.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equal to thehomer, and to 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularlyof flour and grains (1Kings 4:22; 1Kings 5:11; 2Chron.2:10; 27:5; Ezra 7:22). In the LXX, cor is also a measure of liquidvolume, particularly oil (1Kings 5:11; 2Chron. 2:10; Ezra45:14).
Ephah.Approximately 3⁄5 bushel (6 gallons, or 22.7 liters).Equivalent to 10 omers, or 1⁄10 homer. Used for measuring flourand grains (e.g., Exod. 29:40; Lev. 6:20). Isaiah prophesied a day ofreduced agricultural yield, when a homer of seed would produce onlyan ephah of grain (Isa. 5:10). The ephah was equal in size to thebath (Ezek. 45:11), which typically was used for liquid measurements.
Homer.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equivalent to1 cor, or 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularly ofvarious grains (Lev. 27:16; Isa. 5:10; Ezek. 45:11, 13–14; Hos.3:2). This is probably a natural measure of the load that a donkeycan carry, in the range of 90 kilograms. There may have existed adirect link between capacity and monetary value, given Lev. 27:16:“fifty shekels of silver to a homer of barley seed.” Alogical deduction of capacity and cost based on known equivalencesmight look something like this:
1homer = 1 mina; 1 ephah = 5 shekels; 1 omer = 1 beka
Koros.Approximately 10 bushels (95 gallons, or 360 liters). A Greek measureof grain (Luke 16:7).
Omer.Approximately 2 quarts, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄10ephah, 1⁄100 homer (Ezek. 45:11). Used by Israel in themeasurement and collection of manna in the wilderness (Exod.16:16–36) and thus roughly equivalent to a person’s dailyfood ration.
Saton.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1 seah. Themeasurement of flour in Jesus’ parable of the kingdom of heaven(Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:21).
Seah.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄3 ephah,or 1 saton. Used to measure flour, grain, seed, and other various drygoods (e.g., 2Kings 7:1; 1Sam. 25:18).
LiquidVolume
Bath.Approximately 6 gallons, or 22.7 liters. Equivalent to 1 ephah, whichtypically was used for measurements of dry capacity. Used in themeasurement of water (1Kings 7:26), oil (1Kings 5:11),and wine (2Chron. 2:10; Isa. 5:10).
Batos.Approximately 8 gallons, or 30.3 liters. A Greek transliteration ofthe Hebrew word bath(see above). A measure of oil (Luke 16:6).
Hin.Approximately 4 quarts (1gallon, or 3.8 liters). Equivalent to1⁄6 bath and 12 logs. Used in the measurement of water (Ezek.4:11), oil (Ezek. 46:5), and wine (Num. 28:14).
Log.Approximately 1⁄3 quart, or 0.3 liter. Equivalent to 1⁄72bath and 1⁄12 hin. Mentioned five times in Scripture,specifically used to measure oil (Lev. 14:10–24).
Metretes.Approximately 10 gallons, or 37.8 liters. Used in the measurement ofwater at the wedding feast (John 2:6).
It is difficult to imagine a world without consistentmetrological systems. Society’s basic structures, from economyto law, require a uniform and accurate method for measuring time,distances, weights, volumes, and so on. In today’s world,technological advancements allow people to measure various aspects ofthe universe with incredible accuracy—from nanometers tolight-years, milligrams to kilograms.
Themetrological systems employed in biblical times span the sameconcepts as our own modern-day systems: weight, linear distance, andvolume or capacity. However, the systems of weights and measurementsemployed during the span of biblical times were not nearly asaccurate or uniform as the modern units employed today. Preexistingweight and measurement systems existed in the contextual surroundingsof both the OT and the NT authors and thus heavily influenced thesystems employed by the Israelite nation as well as the NT writers.There was great variance between the different standards usedmerchant to merchant (Gen. 23:16), city to city, region to region,time period to time period, even despite the commands to use honestscales and honest weights (Lev. 19:35–36; Deut. 25:13–15;Prov. 11:1; 16:11; 20:23; Ezek. 45:10).
Furthermore,inconsistencies and contradictions exist within the written recordsas well as between archaeological specimens. In addition, significantdifferences are found between preexilic and postexilic measurementsin the biblical texts, and an attempt at merging dry capacity andliquid volume measurements further complicated the issue. This is tobe expected, especially when we consider modern-dayinconsistencies—for example, 1 US liquid pint= 0.473liters, while 1 US dry pint= 0.550 liters. Thus, all modernequivalents given below are approximations, and even the bestestimates have a margin of error of + 5percent or more.
Weights
Weightsin biblical times were carried in a bag or a satchel (Deut. 25:13;Prov. 16:11; Mic. 6:11) and were stones, usually carved into variousanimal shapes for easy identification. Their side or flat bottom wasinscribed with the associated weight and unit of measurement.Thousands of historical artifacts, which differ by significantamounts, have been discovered by archaeologists and thus have greatlycomplicated the work of determining accurate modern-day equivalents.
Beka.Approximately 1⁄5 ounce, or 5.6 grams. Equivalent to 10 gerahsor ½ the sanctuary shekel (Exod. 38:26). Used to measuremetals and goods such as gold (Gen. 24:22).
Gerah.1⁄50 ounce, or 0.56 grams. Equivalent to 1⁄10 beka, 1⁄20shekel (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25).
Litra.Approximately 12 ounces, or 340 grams. A Roman measure of weight.Used only twice in the NT (John 12:3; 19:39). The precursor to themodern British pound.
Mina.Approximately 1¼ pounds, or 0.56 kilograms. Equivalent to 50shekels. Used to weigh gold (1Kings 10:17; Ezra 2:69), silver(Neh. 7:71–72), and other goods. The prophet Ezekiel redefinedthe proper weight: “Theshekel is to consist of twentygerahs. Twenty shekels plus twenty-five shekels plus fifteen shekelsequal one mina” (Ezek. 45:12). Before this redefinition, therewere arguably 50 shekels per mina. In Jesus’ parable of theservants, he describes the master entrusting to his three servantsvarying amounts—10 minas, 5 minas, 1 mina—implying amonetary value (Luke 19:11–24), probably of either silver orgold. One mina was equivalent to approximately three months’wages for a laborer.
Pim.Approximately 1⁄3 ounce, or 9.3 grams. Equivalent to 2⁄3shekel. Referenced only once in the Scriptures (1Sam. 13:21).
Shekel.Approximately 2⁄5 ounce, or 11 grams. Equivalent toapproximately 2 bekas. The shekel is the basic unit of weightmeasurement in Israelite history, though its actual weight variedsignificantly at different historical points. Examples include the“royal shekel” (2Sam. 14:26), the “commonshekel” (2Kings 7:1), and the “sanctuary shekel,”which was equivalent to 20 gerahs (e.g., Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25;Num. 3:47). Because it was used to weigh out silver or gold, theshekel also functioned as a common monetary unit in the NT world.
Talent.Approximately 75 pounds, or 34 kilograms. Equivalent to approximately60 minas. Various metals were weighed using talents: gold (Exod.25:39; 37:24; 1Chron. 20:2), silver (Exod. 38:27; 1Kings20:39; 2Kings 5:22), and bronze (Exod. 38:29). This probably isderived from the weight of a load that a man could carry.
Table12. Biblical Weights and Measures and Their Modern Equivalents:
Weights
Beka– 10 geraahs; ½ shekel = 1/5 ounce = 5.6 grams
Gerah– 1/10 beka; 1/20 shekel = 1/50 ounce = 0.56 grams
Litra– 12 ounces = 340 grams
Mina– 50 shekels = 1 ¼ pounds = 0.56 kilograms
Pim– 2/3 shekel = 1/3 ounce = 9.3 grams
Shekel– 2 bekas; 20 gerahs = 2/5 ounce = 11 grams
Talent– 60 minas = 75 pounds = 34 kilograms
Linearmeasurements
Cubit– 6 handbreadths = 18 inches = 45.7 centimeters
Day’sjourney = 20-25 miles = 32-40 kilometerse
Fingerbreadth– ¼ handbreadth = ¾ inch = 1.9 centimeterse
Handbreadth– 1/6 cubit = 3 inches = 7.6 centimeters
Milion– 1 mile = 1.6 kilometers
Orguia– 1/100 stadion = 5 feet 11 inches = 1.8 meters
Reed/rod– 108 inches = 274 centimeters
Sabbathday’s journey – 2,000 cubits = ¾ mile = 1.2kilometers
Span– 3 handbreadths = 9 inches = 22.8 centimeters
Stadion– 100 orguiai = 607 feet = 185 meters
Capacity
Cab– 1 omer = ½ gallon = 1.9 liters
Choinix– ¼ gallon = 0.9 liters
Cor– 1 homer; 10 ephahs = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Ephah– 10 omers; 1/10 homer = 3/5 bushel; 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Homer– 10 ephahs; 1 cor = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Koros– 10 bushels; 95 gallons – 360 liters
Omer– 1/10 ephah; 1/100 homer = 2 quarts = 1.9 liters
Saton– 1 seah = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
Seah– 1/3 ephah; 1 saton = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
LiquidVolume
Bath– 1 ephah = 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Batos– 8 gallons = 30.3 liters
Hin– 1/6 bath; 12 logs = 1 gallon; 4 quarts = 3.8 liters
Log– 1/72 bath; 1/12 hin = 1/3 quart = 0.3 liters
Metretes– 10 gallons = 37.8 literes
LinearMeasurements
Linearmeasurements were based upon readily available natural measurementssuch as the distance between the elbow and the hand or between thethumb and the little finger. While convenient, this method ofmeasurement gave rise to significant inconsistencies.
Cubit.Approximately 18 inches, or 45.7 centimeters. Equivalent to 6handbreadths. The standard biblical measure of linear distance, asthe shekel is the standard measurement of weight. The distance fromthe elbow to the outstretched fingertip. Used to describe height,width, length (Exod. 25:10), distance (John 21:8), and depth (Gen.7:20). Use of the cubit is ancient. For simple and approximateconversion into modern units, divide the number of cubits in half formeters, then multiply the number of meters by 3 to arrive at feet.
1cubit = 2 spans = 6 handbreadths = 24 fingerbreadths
Day’sjourney.An approximate measure of distance equivalent to about 20–25miles, or 32–40 kilometers. Several passages reference a singleor multiple days’ journey as a description of the distancetraveled or the distance between two points: “a day’sjourney” (Num. 11:31; 1Kings 19:4), “a three-dayjourney” (Gen. 30:36; Exod. 3:18; 8:27; Jon. 3:3), “sevendays” (Gen. 31:23), and “eleven days” (Deut. 1:2).After visiting Jerusalem for Passover, Jesus’ parents journeyedfor a day (Luke 2:44) before realizing that he was not with them.
Fingerbreadth.The width of the finger, or ¼ of a handbreadth, approximately¾ inch, or 1.9 centimeters. The fingerbreadth was thebeginning building block of the biblical metrological system forlinear measurements. Used only once in the Scriptures, to describethe bronze pillars (Jer. 52:21).
Handbreadth.Approximately 3 inches, or 7.6 centimeters. Equivalent to 1/6 cubit,or four fingerbreadths. Probably the width at the base of the fourfingers. A short measure of length, thus compared to a human’sbrief life (Ps. 39:5). Also the width of the rim on the bread table(Exod. 25:25) and the thickness of the bronze Sea (1Kings7:26).
Milion.Translated “mile” in Matt. 5:41. Greek transliteration ofRoman measurement mille passuum, “a thousand paces.”
Orguia.Approximately 5 feet 11 inches, or 1.8 meters. Also translated as“fathom.” A Greek unit of measurement. Probably thedistance between outstretched fingertip to fingertip. Used to measurethe depth of water (Acts 27:28).
Reed/rod.Approximately 108 inches, or 274 centimeters. This is also a generalterm for a measuring device rather than a specific linear distance(Ezek. 40:3, 5; 42:16–19; Rev. 11:1; 21:15).
Sabbathday’s journey.Approximately ¾ mile, or 1.2 kilometers (Acts 1:12). About2,000 cubits.
Span.Approximately 9 inches, or 22.8 centimeters. Equivalent to threehandbreadths, and ½ cubit. The distance from outstretchedthumb tip to little-finger tip. The length and width of the priest’sbreastpiece (Exod. 28:16).
Stadion.Approximately 607 feet, or 185 meters. Equivalent to 100 orguiai.Used in the measurement of large distances (Matt. 14:24; Luke 24:13;John 6:19; 11:18; Rev. 14:20; 21:16).
LandArea
Seed.The size of a piece of land could also be measured on the basis ofhow much seed was required to plant that field (Lev. 27:16; 1Kings18:32).
Yoke.Fields and lands were measured using logical, available means. Inbiblical times, this meant the amount of land a pair of yoked animalscould plow in one day (1Sam. 14:14; Isa. 5:10).
Capacity
Cab.Approximately ½ gallon, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1 omer.Mentioned only once in the Scriptures, during the siege of Samaria(2Kings 6:25).
Choinix.Approximately ¼ gallon, or 0.9 liters. A Greek measurement,mentioned only once in Scripture (Rev. 6:6).
Cor.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equal to thehomer, and to 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularlyof flour and grains (1Kings 4:22; 1Kings 5:11; 2Chron.2:10; 27:5; Ezra 7:22). In the LXX, cor is also a measure of liquidvolume, particularly oil (1Kings 5:11; 2Chron. 2:10; Ezra45:14).
Ephah.Approximately 3⁄5 bushel (6 gallons, or 22.7 liters).Equivalent to 10 omers, or 1⁄10 homer. Used for measuring flourand grains (e.g., Exod. 29:40; Lev. 6:20). Isaiah prophesied a day ofreduced agricultural yield, when a homer of seed would produce onlyan ephah of grain (Isa. 5:10). The ephah was equal in size to thebath (Ezek. 45:11), which typically was used for liquid measurements.
Homer.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equivalent to1 cor, or 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularly ofvarious grains (Lev. 27:16; Isa. 5:10; Ezek. 45:11, 13–14; Hos.3:2). This is probably a natural measure of the load that a donkeycan carry, in the range of 90 kilograms. There may have existed adirect link between capacity and monetary value, given Lev. 27:16:“fifty shekels of silver to a homer of barley seed.” Alogical deduction of capacity and cost based on known equivalencesmight look something like this:
1homer = 1 mina; 1 ephah = 5 shekels; 1 omer = 1 beka
Koros.Approximately 10 bushels (95 gallons, or 360 liters). A Greek measureof grain (Luke 16:7).
Omer.Approximately 2 quarts, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄10ephah, 1⁄100 homer (Ezek. 45:11). Used by Israel in themeasurement and collection of manna in the wilderness (Exod.16:16–36) and thus roughly equivalent to a person’s dailyfood ration.
Saton.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1 seah. Themeasurement of flour in Jesus’ parable of the kingdom of heaven(Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:21).
Seah.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄3 ephah,or 1 saton. Used to measure flour, grain, seed, and other various drygoods (e.g., 2Kings 7:1; 1Sam. 25:18).
LiquidVolume
Bath.Approximately 6 gallons, or 22.7 liters. Equivalent to 1 ephah, whichtypically was used for measurements of dry capacity. Used in themeasurement of water (1Kings 7:26), oil (1Kings 5:11),and wine (2Chron. 2:10; Isa. 5:10).
Batos.Approximately 8 gallons, or 30.3 liters. A Greek transliteration ofthe Hebrew word bath(see above). A measure of oil (Luke 16:6).
Hin.Approximately 4 quarts (1gallon, or 3.8 liters). Equivalent to1⁄6 bath and 12 logs. Used in the measurement of water (Ezek.4:11), oil (Ezek. 46:5), and wine (Num. 28:14).
Log.Approximately 1⁄3 quart, or 0.3 liter. Equivalent to 1⁄72bath and 1⁄12 hin. Mentioned five times in Scripture,specifically used to measure oil (Lev. 14:10–24).
Metretes.Approximately 10 gallons, or 37.8 liters. Used in the measurement ofwater at the wedding feast (John 2:6).
It is difficult to imagine a world without consistentmetrological systems. Society’s basic structures, from economyto law, require a uniform and accurate method for measuring time,distances, weights, volumes, and so on. In today’s world,technological advancements allow people to measure various aspects ofthe universe with incredible accuracy—from nanometers tolight-years, milligrams to kilograms.
Themetrological systems employed in biblical times span the sameconcepts as our own modern-day systems: weight, linear distance, andvolume or capacity. However, the systems of weights and measurementsemployed during the span of biblical times were not nearly asaccurate or uniform as the modern units employed today. Preexistingweight and measurement systems existed in the contextual surroundingsof both the OT and the NT authors and thus heavily influenced thesystems employed by the Israelite nation as well as the NT writers.There was great variance between the different standards usedmerchant to merchant (Gen. 23:16), city to city, region to region,time period to time period, even despite the commands to use honestscales and honest weights (Lev. 19:35–36; Deut. 25:13–15;Prov. 11:1; 16:11; 20:23; Ezek. 45:10).
Furthermore,inconsistencies and contradictions exist within the written recordsas well as between archaeological specimens. In addition, significantdifferences are found between preexilic and postexilic measurementsin the biblical texts, and an attempt at merging dry capacity andliquid volume measurements further complicated the issue. This is tobe expected, especially when we consider modern-dayinconsistencies—for example, 1 US liquid pint= 0.473liters, while 1 US dry pint= 0.550 liters. Thus, all modernequivalents given below are approximations, and even the bestestimates have a margin of error of + 5percent or more.
Weights
Weightsin biblical times were carried in a bag or a satchel (Deut. 25:13;Prov. 16:11; Mic. 6:11) and were stones, usually carved into variousanimal shapes for easy identification. Their side or flat bottom wasinscribed with the associated weight and unit of measurement.Thousands of historical artifacts, which differ by significantamounts, have been discovered by archaeologists and thus have greatlycomplicated the work of determining accurate modern-day equivalents.
Beka.Approximately 1⁄5 ounce, or 5.6 grams. Equivalent to 10 gerahsor ½ the sanctuary shekel (Exod. 38:26). Used to measuremetals and goods such as gold (Gen. 24:22).
Gerah.1⁄50 ounce, or 0.56 grams. Equivalent to 1⁄10 beka, 1⁄20shekel (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25).
Litra.Approximately 12 ounces, or 340 grams. A Roman measure of weight.Used only twice in the NT (John 12:3; 19:39). The precursor to themodern British pound.
Mina.Approximately 1¼ pounds, or 0.56 kilograms. Equivalent to 50shekels. Used to weigh gold (1Kings 10:17; Ezra 2:69), silver(Neh. 7:71–72), and other goods. The prophet Ezekiel redefinedthe proper weight: “Theshekel is to consist of twentygerahs. Twenty shekels plus twenty-five shekels plus fifteen shekelsequal one mina” (Ezek. 45:12). Before this redefinition, therewere arguably 50 shekels per mina. In Jesus’ parable of theservants, he describes the master entrusting to his three servantsvarying amounts—10 minas, 5 minas, 1 mina—implying amonetary value (Luke 19:11–24), probably of either silver orgold. One mina was equivalent to approximately three months’wages for a laborer.
Pim.Approximately 1⁄3 ounce, or 9.3 grams. Equivalent to 2⁄3shekel. Referenced only once in the Scriptures (1Sam. 13:21).
Shekel.Approximately 2⁄5 ounce, or 11 grams. Equivalent toapproximately 2 bekas. The shekel is the basic unit of weightmeasurement in Israelite history, though its actual weight variedsignificantly at different historical points. Examples include the“royal shekel” (2Sam. 14:26), the “commonshekel” (2Kings 7:1), and the “sanctuary shekel,”which was equivalent to 20 gerahs (e.g., Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25;Num. 3:47). Because it was used to weigh out silver or gold, theshekel also functioned as a common monetary unit in the NT world.
Talent.Approximately 75 pounds, or 34 kilograms. Equivalent to approximately60 minas. Various metals were weighed using talents: gold (Exod.25:39; 37:24; 1Chron. 20:2), silver (Exod. 38:27; 1Kings20:39; 2Kings 5:22), and bronze (Exod. 38:29). This probably isderived from the weight of a load that a man could carry.
Table12. Biblical Weights and Measures and Their Modern Equivalents:
Weights
Beka– 10 geraahs; ½ shekel = 1/5 ounce = 5.6 grams
Gerah– 1/10 beka; 1/20 shekel = 1/50 ounce = 0.56 grams
Litra– 12 ounces = 340 grams
Mina– 50 shekels = 1 ¼ pounds = 0.56 kilograms
Pim– 2/3 shekel = 1/3 ounce = 9.3 grams
Shekel– 2 bekas; 20 gerahs = 2/5 ounce = 11 grams
Talent– 60 minas = 75 pounds = 34 kilograms
Linearmeasurements
Cubit– 6 handbreadths = 18 inches = 45.7 centimeters
Day’sjourney = 20-25 miles = 32-40 kilometerse
Fingerbreadth– ¼ handbreadth = ¾ inch = 1.9 centimeterse
Handbreadth– 1/6 cubit = 3 inches = 7.6 centimeters
Milion– 1 mile = 1.6 kilometers
Orguia– 1/100 stadion = 5 feet 11 inches = 1.8 meters
Reed/rod– 108 inches = 274 centimeters
Sabbathday’s journey – 2,000 cubits = ¾ mile = 1.2kilometers
Span– 3 handbreadths = 9 inches = 22.8 centimeters
Stadion– 100 orguiai = 607 feet = 185 meters
Capacity
Cab– 1 omer = ½ gallon = 1.9 liters
Choinix– ¼ gallon = 0.9 liters
Cor– 1 homer; 10 ephahs = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Ephah– 10 omers; 1/10 homer = 3/5 bushel; 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Homer– 10 ephahs; 1 cor = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Koros– 10 bushels; 95 gallons – 360 liters
Omer– 1/10 ephah; 1/100 homer = 2 quarts = 1.9 liters
Saton– 1 seah = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
Seah– 1/3 ephah; 1 saton = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
LiquidVolume
Bath– 1 ephah = 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Batos– 8 gallons = 30.3 liters
Hin– 1/6 bath; 12 logs = 1 gallon; 4 quarts = 3.8 liters
Log– 1/72 bath; 1/12 hin = 1/3 quart = 0.3 liters
Metretes– 10 gallons = 37.8 literes
LinearMeasurements
Linearmeasurements were based upon readily available natural measurementssuch as the distance between the elbow and the hand or between thethumb and the little finger. While convenient, this method ofmeasurement gave rise to significant inconsistencies.
Cubit.Approximately 18 inches, or 45.7 centimeters. Equivalent to 6handbreadths. The standard biblical measure of linear distance, asthe shekel is the standard measurement of weight. The distance fromthe elbow to the outstretched fingertip. Used to describe height,width, length (Exod. 25:10), distance (John 21:8), and depth (Gen.7:20). Use of the cubit is ancient. For simple and approximateconversion into modern units, divide the number of cubits in half formeters, then multiply the number of meters by 3 to arrive at feet.
1cubit = 2 spans = 6 handbreadths = 24 fingerbreadths
Day’sjourney.An approximate measure of distance equivalent to about 20–25miles, or 32–40 kilometers. Several passages reference a singleor multiple days’ journey as a description of the distancetraveled or the distance between two points: “a day’sjourney” (Num. 11:31; 1Kings 19:4), “a three-dayjourney” (Gen. 30:36; Exod. 3:18; 8:27; Jon. 3:3), “sevendays” (Gen. 31:23), and “eleven days” (Deut. 1:2).After visiting Jerusalem for Passover, Jesus’ parents journeyedfor a day (Luke 2:44) before realizing that he was not with them.
Fingerbreadth.The width of the finger, or ¼ of a handbreadth, approximately¾ inch, or 1.9 centimeters. The fingerbreadth was thebeginning building block of the biblical metrological system forlinear measurements. Used only once in the Scriptures, to describethe bronze pillars (Jer. 52:21).
Handbreadth.Approximately 3 inches, or 7.6 centimeters. Equivalent to 1/6 cubit,or four fingerbreadths. Probably the width at the base of the fourfingers. A short measure of length, thus compared to a human’sbrief life (Ps. 39:5). Also the width of the rim on the bread table(Exod. 25:25) and the thickness of the bronze Sea (1Kings7:26).
Milion.Translated “mile” in Matt. 5:41. Greek transliteration ofRoman measurement mille passuum, “a thousand paces.”
Orguia.Approximately 5 feet 11 inches, or 1.8 meters. Also translated as“fathom.” A Greek unit of measurement. Probably thedistance between outstretched fingertip to fingertip. Used to measurethe depth of water (Acts 27:28).
Reed/rod.Approximately 108 inches, or 274 centimeters. This is also a generalterm for a measuring device rather than a specific linear distance(Ezek. 40:3, 5; 42:16–19; Rev. 11:1; 21:15).
Sabbathday’s journey.Approximately ¾ mile, or 1.2 kilometers (Acts 1:12). About2,000 cubits.
Span.Approximately 9 inches, or 22.8 centimeters. Equivalent to threehandbreadths, and ½ cubit. The distance from outstretchedthumb tip to little-finger tip. The length and width of the priest’sbreastpiece (Exod. 28:16).
Stadion.Approximately 607 feet, or 185 meters. Equivalent to 100 orguiai.Used in the measurement of large distances (Matt. 14:24; Luke 24:13;John 6:19; 11:18; Rev. 14:20; 21:16).
LandArea
Seed.The size of a piece of land could also be measured on the basis ofhow much seed was required to plant that field (Lev. 27:16; 1Kings18:32).
Yoke.Fields and lands were measured using logical, available means. Inbiblical times, this meant the amount of land a pair of yoked animalscould plow in one day (1Sam. 14:14; Isa. 5:10).
Capacity
Cab.Approximately ½ gallon, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1 omer.Mentioned only once in the Scriptures, during the siege of Samaria(2Kings 6:25).
Choinix.Approximately ¼ gallon, or 0.9 liters. A Greek measurement,mentioned only once in Scripture (Rev. 6:6).
Cor.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equal to thehomer, and to 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularlyof flour and grains (1Kings 4:22; 1Kings 5:11; 2Chron.2:10; 27:5; Ezra 7:22). In the LXX, cor is also a measure of liquidvolume, particularly oil (1Kings 5:11; 2Chron. 2:10; Ezra45:14).
Ephah.Approximately 3⁄5 bushel (6 gallons, or 22.7 liters).Equivalent to 10 omers, or 1⁄10 homer. Used for measuring flourand grains (e.g., Exod. 29:40; Lev. 6:20). Isaiah prophesied a day ofreduced agricultural yield, when a homer of seed would produce onlyan ephah of grain (Isa. 5:10). The ephah was equal in size to thebath (Ezek. 45:11), which typically was used for liquid measurements.
Homer.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equivalent to1 cor, or 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularly ofvarious grains (Lev. 27:16; Isa. 5:10; Ezek. 45:11, 13–14; Hos.3:2). This is probably a natural measure of the load that a donkeycan carry, in the range of 90 kilograms. There may have existed adirect link between capacity and monetary value, given Lev. 27:16:“fifty shekels of silver to a homer of barley seed.” Alogical deduction of capacity and cost based on known equivalencesmight look something like this:
1homer = 1 mina; 1 ephah = 5 shekels; 1 omer = 1 beka
Koros.Approximately 10 bushels (95 gallons, or 360 liters). A Greek measureof grain (Luke 16:7).
Omer.Approximately 2 quarts, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄10ephah, 1⁄100 homer (Ezek. 45:11). Used by Israel in themeasurement and collection of manna in the wilderness (Exod.16:16–36) and thus roughly equivalent to a person’s dailyfood ration.
Saton.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1 seah. Themeasurement of flour in Jesus’ parable of the kingdom of heaven(Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:21).
Seah.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄3 ephah,or 1 saton. Used to measure flour, grain, seed, and other various drygoods (e.g., 2Kings 7:1; 1Sam. 25:18).
LiquidVolume
Bath.Approximately 6 gallons, or 22.7 liters. Equivalent to 1 ephah, whichtypically was used for measurements of dry capacity. Used in themeasurement of water (1Kings 7:26), oil (1Kings 5:11),and wine (2Chron. 2:10; Isa. 5:10).
Batos.Approximately 8 gallons, or 30.3 liters. A Greek transliteration ofthe Hebrew word bath(see above). A measure of oil (Luke 16:6).
Hin.Approximately 4 quarts (1gallon, or 3.8 liters). Equivalent to1⁄6 bath and 12 logs. Used in the measurement of water (Ezek.4:11), oil (Ezek. 46:5), and wine (Num. 28:14).
Log.Approximately 1⁄3 quart, or 0.3 liter. Equivalent to 1⁄72bath and 1⁄12 hin. Mentioned five times in Scripture,specifically used to measure oil (Lev. 14:10–24).
Metretes.Approximately 10 gallons, or 37.8 liters. Used in the measurement ofwater at the wedding feast (John 2:6).
The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesusfollowers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christembodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in humanhistory.
Introduction
Name.Early Christians combined the name “Jesus” with the title“Christ” (Acts 5:42; NIV: “Messiah”). Thename “Jesus,” from the Hebrew Yehoshua or Yeshua, was acommon male name in first-century Judaism. The title “Christ”is from the Greek christos, a translation of the Hebrew mashiakh(“anointed one, messiah”). Christians eventually werenamed after Jesus’ title (Acts 11:26). During the ministry ofJesus, Peter was the first disciple to recognize Jesus as the Messiah(Matt. 16:16; Mark 9:29; Luke 9:20).
Sources.From the viewpoint of Christianity, the life and ministry of Jesusconstitute the turning point in human history. From a historicalperspective, ample early source materials would be expected. Indeed,both Christian and non-Christian first-century and earlysecond-century literary sources are extant, but they are few innumber. In part, this low incidence is due to society’s initialresistance to the Jesus followers’ movement. The ancient Romanhistorian Tacitus called Christianity “a superstition,”since its beliefs did not fit with the culture’s prevailingworldview and thus were considered antisocial. Early literary sourcestherefore are either in-group documents or allusions in non-Christiansources.
TheNT Gospels are the principal sources for the life and ministry ofJesus. They consist of Matthew, Mark, Luke (the Synoptic Gospels),and John. Most scholars adhere to the so-called Four SourceHypothesis. In this theory, Mark was written first and was used as asource by Matthew and Luke, who also used the sayings source Q (fromGerman Quelle, meaning “source”) as well as their ownindividual sources M (Matthew) and L (Luke). John used additionalsources.
Theearly church tried to put together singular accounts, so-calledGospel harmonies, of the life of Jesus. The Gospel of the Ebionitesrepresents one such attempt based on the Synoptic Gospels. Anotherharmony, the Diatessaron, based on all four Gospels, was producedaround AD 170 by Tatian. Additional source materials concerning thelife of Christ are provided in the NT in texts such as Acts, thePauline Epistles, the General Epistles, and the Revelation of John.Paul wrote to the Galatians, “But when the time had fully come,God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law” (Gal. 4:4).The first narrative about Jesus by the Christian community was apassion narrative, the account of his death and resurrection. Thefirst extant references to this tradition are found in Paul’sletters (1Cor. 2:2; Gal. 3:1). The resurrection was recognizedfrom the beginning as the cornerstone of the Christian faith (1Cor.15:13–14).
Amongnon-Christian sources, the earliest reference to Jesus is found in aletter written circa AD 112 by Pliny the Younger, the Roman governorof Bithynia-Pontus (Ep. 10.96). The Roman historian Tacitus mentionsChristians and Jesus around AD 115 in his famous work about thehistory of Rome (Ann. 15.44). Another Roman historian, Suetonius,wrote around the same time concerning unrest among the Jews in Romebecause of a certain “Chrestos” (Claud. 25.4). Somescholars conclude that “Chrestos” is a misspelling of“Christos,” a reference to Jesus.
TheJewish author Josephus (first century AD) mentions Jesus in a storyabout the Jewish high priest Ananus and James the brother of Jesus(Ant. 20.200). A controversial reference to Jesus appears in adifferent part of the same work, where Josephus affirms that Jesus isthe Messiah and that he rose from the dead (Ant. 18.63–64). Themajority of scholars consider this passage to be authentic butheavily edited by later Christian copyists. Another Jewish source,the Talmud, also mentions Jesus in several places, but thesereferences are very late and of little historical value.
NoncanonicalGospels that mention Jesus include, for example, the Infancy Gospelof Thomas, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel ofJames, the Gospel of Judas Iscariot, the Gospel of the Hebrews, theEgerton Gospel, and the Gospel of Judas. Although some of these maycontain an occasional authentic saying or event, for the most partthey are late and unreliable.
Jesus’Life
Birthand childhood. TheGospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehemduring the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesuswas probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’sdeath (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of avirginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18;Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governorQuirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place inBethlehem (2:1–5). Both the census and the governorship at thetime of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars.Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to eitherconfirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must bedetermined on the basis of one’s view regarding the generalreliability of the Gospel tradition.
Onthe eighth day after his birth, Jesus was circumcised, in keepingwith the Jewish law, at which time he officially was named “Jesus”(Luke 2:21). He spent his growing years in Nazareth, in the home ofhis parents, Joseph and Mary (2:40). Of the NT Gospels, the Gospel ofLuke contains the only brief portrayal of Jesus’ growth instrength, wisdom, and favor with God and people (2:40, 52). Luke alsocontains the only account of Jesus as a young boy (2:41–49).
Jesuswas born in a lower socioeconomic setting. His parents offered atemple sacrifice appropriate for those who could not afford tosacrifice a sheep (Luke 2:22–24; cf. Lev. 12:8). Joseph, Jesus’earthly father, was a carpenter or an artisan in wood, stone, ormetal (Matt. 13:55). From a geographical perspective, Nazareth wasnot a prominent place for settling, since it lacked fertile ground.Jesus’ disciple Nathanael expressed an apparently commonfirst-century sentiment concerning Nazareth: “Nazareth! Cananything good come from there?” (John 1:46).
Jesuswas also born in a context of scandal. Questions of illegitimacy weresurely raised, since his mother Mary was discovered to be pregnantbefore her marriage to Joseph. According to Matthew, only theintervention of an angel convinced Joseph not to break his betrothal(Matt. 1:18–24). Jesus’ birth took place in Bethlehem,far from his parents’ home in Nazareth. According to kinshiphospitality customs, Joseph and Mary would have expected to stay withdistant relatives in Bethlehem. It is likely that they were unwelcomebecause of Jesus’ status as an illegitimate child; thus Maryhad to give birth elsewhere and place the infant Jesus in a feedingtrough (Luke 2:7). A similar response was seen years later inNazareth when Jesus was identified as “Mary’s son”(Mark 6:3) rather than through his paternal line, thereby shaming himas one who was born an illegitimate child. Jesus was likewiserejected at the end of his life as the crowds cried, “Crucifyhim!” (Matt. 27:22–23; Mark 15:13–14; Luke 23:21;John 19:6, 15). When Jesus was arrested, most of his followers fled(Matt. 26:56; Mark 14:50–52), and a core disciple, Peter,vehemently denied knowing him (Matt. 26:69–74; Mark 14:66–71;Luke 22:55–60; John 18:15–17, 25–27). His ownsiblings did not believe in him (John 7:5) and were evidently ashamedof his fate, since from the cross Jesus placed the care of his motherinto the hands of “the disciple whom he loved” (19:26–27)rather than the next brother in line, as was customary.
Baptism,temptation, and start of ministry.After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring tohim as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22).Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instantministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into thewilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11;Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that thetemptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Lukeidentify three specific temptations by the devil, though their orderfor the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesuswas tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine interventionafter jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’skingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation,quoting Scripture in response.
Matthewand Mark record that Jesus began his ministry in Capernaum inGalilee, after the arrest of John the Baptist (Matt. 4:12–13;Mark 1:14). Luke says that Jesus started his ministry at about thirtyyears of age (3:23). This may be meant to indicate full maturity orperhaps correlate this age with the onset of the service of theLevites in the temple (cf. Num. 4:3). John narrates the beginning ofJesus’ ministry by focusing on the calling of the disciples andthe sign performed at a wedding at Cana (1:35–2:11).
Jesus’public ministry: chronology.Jesus’ ministry started in Galilee, probably around AD 27/28,and ended with his death around AD 30 in Jerusalem. The temple hadbeen forty-six years in construction (generally interpreted as thetemple itself and the wider temple complex) when Jesus drove out themoney changers (John 2:20). According to Josephus, the rebuilding andexpansion of the second temple had started in 20/19 BC, during theeighteenth year of Herod’s reign (Ant. 15.380). The ministry ofJohn the Baptist had commenced in the fifteenth year of Tiberius(Luke 3:1–2), who had become a coregent in AD 11/12. From thesedates of the start of the temple building and the correlation of thereign of Tiberius to John the Baptist’s ministry, the onset ofJesus’ ministry can probably be dated to AD 27/28.
TheGospel of John mentions three Passovers and another unnamed feast inJohn 5:1. The length of Jesus’ ministry thus extended overthree or four Passovers, equaling about three or three and a halfyears. Passover, which took place on the fifteenth of Nisan, came ona Friday in AD 30 and 33. The year of Jesus’ death wastherefore probably AD 30.
Jesus’ministry years may be divided broadly into his Galilean and hisJudean ministries. The Synoptic Gospels describe the ministry inGalilee from various angles but converge again as Jesus enters Judea.
Galileanministry.The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and aroundGalilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that thekingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment ofprophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ firstteaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30);the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for hiscalling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection andsuffering.
AllGospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in hisGalilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioningof the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers isrecorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministryis the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, inparticular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synopticsfocus on healings and exorcisms.
DuringJesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with hisidentity. However, evil spirits knew him to be of supreme authority(Mark 3:11). Jesus was criticized by outsiders and by his own family(3:21). The scribes from Jerusalem identified him as a partner ofBeelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesustold parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growingkingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humblebeginnings (4:1–32).
TheSynoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful.No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority orability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized manydemons (Mark 5:1–13), raised the dead (Mark 5:35–42), fedfive thousand (Mark 6:30–44), and walked on water (Mark6:48–49).
Inthe later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew andtraveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are notwritten with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns toGalilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey toJerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fearresolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee,where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ discipleswith lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed thePharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents(7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demandinga sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, whoconfessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus didprovide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).
Jesuswithdrew from Galilee to Tyre and Sidon, where a Syrophoenician womanrequested healing for her daughter. Jesus replied, “I was sentonly to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Galileans hadlong resented the Syrian provincial leadership partiality thatallotted governmental funds in ways that made the Jews receive mere“crumbs.” Consequently, when the woman replied, “Eventhe dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table,”Jesus applauded her faith (Matt. 15:27–28). Healing a deaf-muteman in the Decapolis provided another example of Jesus’ministry in Gentile territory (Mark 7:31–37). Peter’sconfession of Jesus as the Christ took place during Jesus’travel to Caesarea Philippi, a well-known Gentile territory. The citywas the ancient center of worship of the Hellenistic god Pan.
Judeanministry.Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry ashe resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually ledto his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem intothree phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27).The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of thejourney. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, andthe demands on discipleship intensified as Jesus approached Jerusalem(Matt. 20:17–19, 26–28; Mark 10:38–39, 43–45;Luke 14:25–35). Luke presents the second phase of the journeytoward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvationand judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase ofthe journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are themain themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).
Socialconflicts with religious leaders increased throughout Jesus’ministry. These conflicts led to lively challenge-riposteinteractions concerning the Pharisaic schools of Shammai and Hillel(Matt. 19:1–12; Mark 10:1–12). Likewise, socioeconomicfeathers were ruffled as Jesus welcomed young children, who hadlittle value in society (Matt. 19:13–15; Mark 10:13–16;Luke 18:15–17).
PassionWeek, death, and resurrection. Eachof the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with thecrowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Lukedescribes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during whichJesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).
InJerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17).Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because thewhole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “beganlooking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segmentof Jerusalem’s temple leadership inquired about Jesus’authority (11:27–33). Jesus replied with cunning questions(12:16, 35–36), stories (12:1–12), denunciation(12:38–44), and a prediction of Jerusalem’s owndestruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, JudasIscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’arrest (14:10–11).
Atthe Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a newcovenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29;Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned thedisciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and laterhe prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agonyand submissiveness in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–42;Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–42). His arrest, trial,crucifixion, death, and resurrection followed (Matt. 26:46–28:15;Mark 14:43–16:8; Luke 22:47–24:9; John 18:1–20:18).Jesus finally commissioned his disciples to continue his mission bymaking disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:8)and ascended to heaven with the promise that he will one day return(Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:9–11).
TheIdentity of Jesus Christ
Variousaspects of Jesus’ identity are stressed in the four NT Gospels,depending on their target audiences. In the Gospels the witnesses toJesus’ ministry are portrayed as constantly questioning andexamining his identity (Matt. 11:2–5; 12:24; 26:63; 27:11; Mark3:22; 8:11; 11:28; 14:61; Luke 7:18–20; 11:15; 22:67, 70;23:39; John 7:20, 25–27; 18:37). Only beings of the spiritualrealm are certain of his divinity (Mark 1:34; 3:11; Luke 4:41). AtJesus’ baptism, God referred to him as his Son, whom he loved(Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Likewise, when Jesus wastransfigured in the presence of Peter, James, and John, a voiceaffirmed, “This is my Son, whom I love” (Matt. 17:5; Mark9:7). At the moment of his death, the questioning of Jesus’identity culminated in a confession by a Roman centurion and otherguards: “Surely he was the Son of God!” (Matt. 27:54; cf.Mark 15:39).
Miracleworker.In the first-century setting, folk healers and miracle workers werepart of the fabric of society. Jesus, however, performed signs andmiracles in order to demonstrate the authority of the kingdom of Godover various realms: disease, illness, the spiritual world, nature,and even future events. Especially in the Gospel of John, Jesus’signs and miracles are used to show his authority and thus hisidentity.
Nochallenge superseded Jesus’ authority. Among his ample miraclesand signs, he changed water into wine (John 2:7–9), calmed astorm in the sea (Matt. 8:23–27; Mark 4:35–39; Luke8:22–25), exorcized demons (Matt. 9:32–34; Mark 5:1–13;Luke 9:42–43), healed the sick (Mark 1:40–44), raised thedead (Matt. 9:23–25; Mark 5:35–42; Luke 7:1–16;8:49–54; John 11:17, 38–44), performed miraculousfeedings (Matt. 14:17–21; 15:34–38; Mark 6:30–44;8:5–9; Luke 9:10–17; John 6:8–13), and walked onwater (Matt. 14:25–26; Mark 6:48–49; John 6:19).
ThePharisees requested miracles as evidence of his authority (Mark8:11–12). Jesus refused, claiming that a wicked and adulterousgeneration asks for a miraculous sign (Matt. 12:38–39; 16:1–4).The only sign that he would give was the sign of Jonah—hisdeath and resurrection three days later—a personal sacrifice,taking upon himself the judgment of the world (Matt. 12:39–41).
Rabbi/teacher.Jesus’ teaching style was similar to other first-century rabbisor Pharisees (Mark 9:5; 10:51; John 1:38; 3:2). What distinguishedhim was that he spoke with great personal authority (Matt. 5:22, 28,32, 39, 44; Mark 1:22). Like other rabbis of his day, Jesus gathereddisciples. He called these men to observe his lifestyle and to joinhim in his ministry of teaching, healing, and exorcism (Matt. 10:1–4;Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16).
Jesusused a variety of teaching methods. He frequently spoke in parables(Matt. 6:24; 13:24–52; 18:10–14, 23–35;21:28–22:14; 24:32–36, 45–51; 25:14–30; Mark4:1–34; 12:1–12; 13:28–34; Luke 8:4–18;12:41–46; 13:18–21; 14:15–24; 15:1–16:15,19–31; 18:1–14; 19:11–27; 20:9–19; 21:29–33),used figures of speech (John 10:9), hyperbole (Matt. 19:24; Mark10:25; Luke 18:25), argumentation (Matt. 26:11), object lessons(Matt. 24:32), frequent repetition (Matt. 13:44–47; Luke13:18–21), practical examples, and personal guidance.
Majorthemes in Jesus’ teaching include the kingdom of God, the costof discipleship, internal righteousness, the end of the age, hisidentity, his mission, and his approaching death. In his teachings,observance of Torah was given new context and meaning because God’skingdom had “come near” (Matt. 3:2). Jesus had come tofulfill the law (Matt. 5:17).
Jesus’teaching ministry often took place amid social conflict. Theseconflicts were couched in so-called challenge-riposte interactions inwhich the honor status of those involved was at stake. Jesus usedthese interactions as teachable moments. When questioned, Jesus gavereplies that reveal omniscience or intimate knowledge of God’swill, especially in the Gospel of John. In the Synoptic Gospels,Jesus’ answers are both ethical and practical in nature. TheSynoptics portray Jesus as challenged repeatedly with accusations ofviolating customs specified in the Jewish law. Jesus’ answersto such accusations often echoed the essence of 1Sam. 15:22,“To obey is better than sacrifice,” phrased by Jesus as“I desire mercy, not sacrifice” (Matt. 9:13; 12:7). Anoverall “better than” ethic was common in Jesus’public teaching.
TheSermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7) contains a “better than”ethic in which internal obedience is better than mere outwardobedience. For example, Jesus said that anger without cause is equalto murder (Matt. 5:21–22), that looking at a woman lustfullyamounts to adultery (Matt. 5:28), and that instead of revengingwrongs one must reciprocate with love (Matt. 5:38–48). Jesusvalued compassion above traditions and customs, even those containedwithin the OT law. He desired internal obedience above the letter ofthe law.
Jesus’teachings found their authority in the reality of God’simminent kingdom (Matt. 3:2; 10:7; Mark 1:15; Luke 10:9),necessitating repentance (Matt. 3:2), belief (Mark 1:15), dependence(Matt. 18:3–5; Mark 10:15), and loyalty to a new community—thefamily of Jesus followers (Mark 3:34; 10:29–30). Jesus urged,“Seek first [God’s] kingdom and his righteousness”(Matt. 6:33). Preaching with such urgency was common among propheticteachers of the intertestamental period. Jesus, however, had his owngrounds for urgency. He held that God deeply valued all humans (Matt.10:31) and would bring judgment swiftly (Matt. 25:31–46).
Examplesof a “greater good” ethic in the Synoptics include theoccasions when Jesus ate with sinners (Mark 2:16–17). Jesusused an aphorism in response to accusations about his associationswith sinners, saying, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor,but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners”(Mark 2:17). He advocated harvesting and healing on the Sabbath (Mark2:23–28; 3:1–6), and when he was accused of breaking thelaw, he pointed to an OT exception (1Sam. 21:1–6) todeclare compassion appropriate for the Sabbath. Jesus also appliedthe “greater good” ethic in the case of divorce, sincewomen suffered the societal stigma of adultery and commonly becameoutcasts following divorce (Matt. 19:8–9; Mark 10:5–9).
Jesus’kingdom teachings were simultaneously spiritual, ethical, andeschatological in application. The teachings were aimed at internaltransformation (Matt. 5:3–9; 18:3; Mark 10:15) and spurring onlove (Matt. 5:44; 7:21). The Spirit of the Lord had called Jesus tobless the hurting ones as they aspired to a godly character. Jesustaught, “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father isperfect” (Matt. 5:48), and “Be merciful, just as yourFather is merciful” (Luke 6:36). The “blessed” onesin Jesus’ teachings are poor of spirit, peace driven, mournful,and hungry for righteousness, consumed with emulating godlycharacter.
Somescholars believe that Jesus promoted an “interim ethic”for the kingdom, intended only for a short period prior to the end oftime. However, he was explicit regarding the longevity of histeachings: “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words willnever pass away” (Matt. 24:35; Luke 16:17).
Messiah.The concept of an anointed one, a messiah, who would restore theglories of David’s kingdom and bring political stability wascommon in Jewish expectation. Both before and after the Babyloniancaptivity, many Jews longed for one who would bring peace andprotection. Israel’s prophets had spoken of a coming deliverer,one who would restore David’s kingdom and reign in justice andrighteousness (2Sam. 7:11–16; Isa. 9:1–7; 11:1–16;Jer. 23:5–6; 33:15–16; Ezek. 37:25; Dan. 2:44; Mic. 5:2;Zech. 9:9). Isaiah’s description of the servant (Isa. 53) whosesuffering healed the nation provided a slightly different angle ofexpectation in terms of a deliverer.
Jesus’authority and popularity as a miracle worker called up messianicimages in first-century Jewish minds. On several occasions hearerscalled him “Son of David,” hoping for the Messiah (Matt.12:23; 21:9). Simon Peter was the first follower who confessed Jesusas the Christ, the “Messiah” (Matt. 16:16; Mark 8:29). Inline with Isaiah’s model of the Suffering Servant, Jesusfocused not on political ends but rather on spiritual regenerationthrough his own sacrificial death (Mark 10:45).
Eschatologicalprophet.Many scholars claim that Jesus is best understood as a Jewishapocalypticist, an eschatological prophet who expected God tointervene in history, destroy the wicked, and bring in the kingdom ofGod. Central in this understanding are Jesus’ propheciesconcerning the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem (Matt. 24:1–2,15–22; Mark 13:1; Luke 21:5–24; John 2:19; Acts 6:14). Inaddition, it is noted that Jesus had twelve disciples, representativeof the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:2–28; Luke 22:23–30).Certain of Jesus’ parables, those with apocalyptic images ofcoming judgment, present Jesus as an eschatological prophet (Matt.24:45–25:30; Luke 12:41–46; 19:11–27).
SufferingSon of God.Jesus’ first recorded teaching in a synagogue in Nazareth wasparadigmatic (Luke 4:16–21). He attributed the reading, Isa.61:1–2, to his personal calling to serve, and in doing so herevealed a trajectory of suffering. The Gospel of Mark likewise aptlyportrays Jesus as the suffering Son of God. Jesus’ ownteachings incorporated his upcoming suffering (Mark 8:31; 9:12–13,31; 10:33–34). He summarized his mission by declaring, “TheSon of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give hislife as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45). His earthly careerended with a trial in Jerusalem consisting of both Roman and Jewishcomponents (Matt. 26:57–68; 27:1–31; Mark 14:53–65;15:1–20; Luke 22:54–23:25; John 18:19–24;18:28–19:16). He was insulted, scourged, mocked, and crucified.
Jesus’suffering culminated in his humiliating death by crucifixion (Matt.27:33–50; Mark 15:22–37; Luke 23:33–46; John19:16–30). Crucifixion was a death of unimaginable horror,bringing shame and humiliation to the victim and his family. Anyonehanging on a tree was considered cursed (Deut. 21:23; Gal. 3:13).Thus, especially in a Jewish society, anyone associated with acrucified person bore the shame of following one who was executed asa lowly slave and left as a cursed corpse. The apostle Paul referredto this shame of the cross when he stated, “I am not ashamed ofthe gospel” (Rom. 1:16).
ExaltedLord.Jesus had prophesied that he would rise again (Matt. 16:21; 17:9, 23;20:19; 27:63; Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:34; Luke 9:22; 18:33; 24:7, 46).The testimony of the Synoptics is that the resurrection of JesusChrist indeed occurred on the third day, Christ having died on Friday(Mark 15:42–45; Luke 23:52–54; John 19:30–33) andrisen again on Sunday (Matt. 28:1–7; Mark 16:2–7; Luke24:1–7; John 20:1–16). The resurrected Jesus waswitnessed by the women (Matt. 28:8–9), the eleven disciples(Matt. 28:16–17; Luke 24:36–43), and travelers on theroad to Emmaus (Luke 24:31–32). According to Paul, he appearedto as many as five hundred others (1Cor. 15:6). He appeared inbodily form, spoke, showed his scars, and ate (Luke 24:39–43;John 20:27; Acts 1:4). After forty postresurrection days, Jesusascended into the heavenly realm (Acts 1:9).
Asmuch as Jesus’ death was the epitome of shame, his victory overdeath was his ultimate exaltation (Phil. 2:5–11). At Pentecost,Peter proclaimed that in the resurrection God fulfilled OT promises(Ps. 16:10) by raising his Son from the grave (Acts 2:30–31).Furthermore, Christ provided freedom from the law through hisresurrection (Rom. 5:13–14), God’s approval of his lifeand work (Phil. 2:8–9), and God’s designation of him asLord over all the earth, the living and the dead (Acts 17:30–31;Phil. 2:10; Heb. 1:3), and over all his enemies (Eph. 1:20–23).
Jesus’exaltation commenced the beginning of forgiveness and justification(Luke 24:46–47; Acts 13:30–39; Rom. 4:25) and hisintercession for the people of God (Rom. 8:34). His ascensionsignaled the coming of the Holy Spirit as comforter and teacher (John14:26; Acts 2:33) and was accompanied by the promise of his return inglory (Luke 24:51), at which time he will render judgment (Matt.19:28; 24:31; Rev. 20:11–15) and establish his eternal kingdom(1Cor. 15:24; 2Tim. 4:1; Rev. 11:15; 22:5).
Jesus’Purpose and Community
Inthe Gospel of Matthew, Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah, whopreaches the good news of the kingdom, urging people to repent(4:17–23). Repentance and belief allow one to enter thekingdom. The call into the kingdom is a call into a new covenant, onemade in Jesus’ blood (26:28).
Inthe prologue to the Gospel of Mark, the narrator reveals the identityof Jesus (1:1). Jesus is presented as the one who brings good tidingsof salvation (cf. Isa. 40:9; 52:7; 61:1). The centrality of thegospel, the good news (Mark 1:14–15), is evident.
Lukelikewise presents the preaching of the good news as a main purpose ofJesus’ ministry (4:43). The content of this good news is thekingdom of God (4:43; 8:1; 16:16). When the disciples of John theBaptist asked Jesus if he was the one who was to come (7:20), Jesusanswered, “Go back and report to John what you have seen andheard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosyare cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good newsis proclaimed to the poor” (7:22). The kingdom of God, aspresented in Luke, brings freedom for the prisoners, recovery ofsight for the blind, and release for the oppressed (4:18). Jesus’healings and exorcisms announce the coming kingdom of God alreadypresent in the ministry of Jesus (4:40–44; 6:18–20;8:1–2; 9:2; 10:8–9).
Inthe Gospel of John, Jesus testifies to the good news by way of signsthroughout his ministry. These signs point to Jesus’ glory, hisidentity, and the significance of his ministry. Jesus is the Messiah,the Son of God, who offers eternal and abundant life. This abundantlife is lived out in community.
Inthe Gospel of John, the disciples of Jesus represent the community ofGod (17:21). The disciples did not belong to the world, but theycontinued to live in the world (17:14–16). Throughout hisministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a callto loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38;Luke 9:23–26), a call to the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50;Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock Iwill build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call tocommunity. Jesus’ presence as the head of the community wasreplaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18).
Jesus’ministry continued in the community of Jesus’ followers, God’sfamily—the church. Entrance into the community was obtained byadopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and through theinitiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26;Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–62; John 1:12; 3:16;10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9).
TheQuests for the Historical Jesus
Thequest for the historical Jesus, or seeking who Jesus was from ahistorical perspective, is a modern phenomenon deemed necessary byscholars who claim that the NT Gospels were written long after Jesus’death and were heavily influenced by the post-Easter understanding ofthe church.
Thebeginning of this quest is often dated to 1770, when the lecturenotes of Hermann Samuel Reimarus were published posthumously.Reimarus had launched an inquiry into the identity of Jesus thatrejected as inauthentic all supernatural elements in the Gospels. Heconcluded that the disciples invented Jesus’ miracles,prophecies, ritualistic religion, and resurrection. Reimarus’sconclusions were not widely accepted, but they set off a flurry ofrationalistic research into the historical Jesus that continuedthroughout the nineteenth century. This became known as the “firstquest” for the historical Jesus.
In1906 German theologian Albert Schweit-zer published The Quest of theHistorical Jesus (German title: Von Reimarus zu Wrede: EineGeschichte der Leben-Jesu-Forschung), a scathing indictment of thefirst quest. Schweitzer’s work showed that nineteenth-centuryresearchers re-created Jesus in their own image, transforming thehistorical Jesus into a modern philanthropist preaching aninoffensive message of love and brotherhood. Schweitzer’sconclusions marked the beginning of the end for this first quest.Schweitzer himself concluded that the historical Jesus was aneschatological prophet whose purposes failed during his last days inJerusalem.
Withthe demise of the first quest, some NT scholars, such as RudolfBultmann, rejected any claim to being able to discover the historicalJesus. This trend continued until 1953, when some of Bultmann’sformer students launched what has come to be known as the “newquest” for the historical Jesus (1953–c. 1970). Thisquest created new interest in the historical Jesus but was stilldominated by the view that the portrait of Jesus in the Gospels islargely a creation of the church in a post-Easter setting.
Asthe rebuilding years of the post–World WarII era wanedand scholars started to reap academic fruit from major archaeologicalfinds such as the DSS, research on the historical Jesus moved on towhat has been called the “third quest.” This quest seeksespecially to research and understand Jesus in his social andcultural setting.
The biblical corpus known as the Pentateuch consists of thefirst five books of the OT: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, andDeuteronomy. The word “Pentateuch” comes from two Greekwords (penta [“five”] and teuchos [“scroll case,book”]) and is a designation attested in the early churchfathers. The collection is also commonly known as the “FiveBooks of Moses,” “the Law of Moses,” or simply the“Law,” reflecting the traditional Jewish name “Torah,”meaning “law” or “instruction.” The Torah isthe first of three major sections that comprise the Hebrew Bible(Torah, Nebiim, Ketubim [Law, Prophets, Writings]); thus for bothJewish and Christian traditions it represents the introduction to theBible as a whole as well as its interpretive foundation.
TheEnglish names for the books of the Pentateuch came from the LatinVulgate, based on the Greek Septuagint. These appellations are mainlydescriptive of their content. Genesis derives from “generations”or “origin,” Exodus means “going out,”Leviticus represents priestly (Levitical) service, Numbers refers tothe censuses taken in the book, and Deuteronomy indicates “secondlaw” because of Moses’ rehearsal of God’s commands(see Deut. 17:18). The Hebrew designations derive from opening wordsin each book. Bereshit (Genesis) means “in the beginning”;Shemot (Exodus), “[these are] the names”; Wayyiqra’(Leviticus), “and he called”; Bemidbar (Numbers), “inthe desert”; and Debarim (Deuteronomy), “[these are] thewords.”
Referringto the Pentateuch as “Torah” or the “Law”reflects the climactic reception of God’s commands at MountSinai, which were to govern Israel’s life and worship in thepromised land, including their journey to get there. However, callingthe Pentateuch the “Law” can be a bit misleading becausethere are relatively few passages that simply list a set of commands,and all law passages are set within a broad narrative. The Pentateuchis a grand story that begins on a universal scale with the creationof the cosmos and ends on the plains of Moab as the readeranticipates the fulfillment of God’s plan to redeem a fallenworld through his chosen people. The books offer distinct qualitiesand content, but they are also inherently dependent upon one another,as the narrative remains unbroken through the five volumes. Genesisends with Jacob’s family in Egypt, and, though many years havepassed, this is where Exodus begins. Leviticus outlines cultic lifeat the tabernacle (constructed at the end of Exodus) and even beginswithout a clear subject (“And he called...”),which requires the reader to supply “the Lord” from thelast verse of Exodus. Numbers begins with an account of Israel’sfighting men as the nation prepares to leave Sinai, and Deuteronomyis Moses’ farewell address to the nation on the cusp of thepromised land.
Authorshipand Composition
Althoughthe Pentateuch is technically an anonymous work, Jewish and Christiantradition attributes its authorship to Moses, the main figure of thestory from Exodus to Deuteronomy. The arguments for attributing theauthorship of the Pentateuch to Moses come from internal evidencewithin both Testaments. That Moses is responsible for at leastportions of the Pentateuch is suggested by references to his explicitliterary activity reflected within the narrative itself (Exod. 17:14;24:4; 34:28; Num. 33:2; Deut. 31:9, 22, 24), if not implied invarious literary formulas such as “the Lord said to Moses”(e.g., Exod. 39:1, 7, 21; Lev. 4:1; 11:1; 13:1; Num. 1:1; 2:1).Mosaic authorship receives support from the historical books, whichuse terms such as “the Book of the Law of Moses” invarious forms and references in the preexilic history (Josh. 8:30–35;23:6; 2Kings 14:6) as well as the postexilic history (e.g.,2Chron. 25:4; Ezra 6:18; Neh. 13:1). The same titles are usedby NT authors (e.g., Mark 12:26; Luke 24:44; John 1:45), evenreferring to the Pentateuch simply by the name “Moses” atvarious points (e.g., Luke 16:29; 24:27; 2Cor. 3:15).
Evenwith these examples, nowhere does the text explicitly state thatMoses is responsible for the entire compilation of the Pentateuch orthat he penned it with his own hand. Rather, a number of factorspoint to a later hand at work: Moses’ death and burial arereferenced (Deut. 34), the conquest of Canaan is referred to as past(Deut. 2:12), and there is evidence that the names of people andplaces were updated and explained for later generations (e.g., “Dan”in Gen. 14:14; cf. Josh. 19:47; Judg. 18:28b–29). Based onthese factors, it is reasonable to believe that the Pentateuchunderwent editorial alteration as it was preserved within Jewish lifeand took its final shape after Moses’ lifetime.
Overthe last century, the Documentary Hypothesis has dominated academicdiscussion of the Pentateuch’s composition. This theory wascrystallized by Julius Wellhausen in his Prolegomena to the Historyof Israel in the late nineteenth century and posits that thePentateuch originated from a variety of ancient sources derived fromdistinct authors and time periods that have been transmitted andjoined through a long and complex process. Traditionally thesedocuments are identified as J, E, D, and P. The J source is adocument authored by the “Yahwist” (German, Jahwist) inJudah around 840 BC and is so called because the name “Yahweh”is used frequently in its text. The E source stands for “Elohist”because of its preference for the divine title “Elohim”and was composed in Israel around 700 BC. The D source stands for“Deuteronomy” because it reflects material found in thatbook; it was composed sometime around Josiah’s reform in 621BC. The P document reflects material that priests would be concernedwith in the postexilic time period, approximately 500 BC. This theoryand its related forms stem from the scholarly concern over variousliterary characteristics such as the use of divine names; doubletsand duplications in the text; observable patterns of style,terminology, and themes; and alleged discrepancies in facts,descriptions, and geographic or historical perspective.
Variousdocumentary theories of composition have flourished over the lastcentury of pentateuchal scholarship and still have many adherents.However, lack of scholarly agreement about the dating and characterof the sources and the rise of other literary approaches to the texthave many conservative and liberal scholars calling into question theaccuracy and even interpretive benefit of the source theories.Moreover, if the literary observations used to create sourcedistinctions can be explained in other ways, then the DocumentaryHypothesis is significantly undermined.
Inits canonical form, the pentateuchal narrative combines artisticprose, poetry, and law to tell a dramatic history spanning thousandsof years. One could divide the story into six major sections:primeval history (Gen. 1–11), the patriarchs (Gen. 12–50),liberation from Egypt (Exod. 1–18), Sinai (Exod. 19:1–Num.10:10), wilderness journey (Num. 10:11–36:13), and Moses’farewell (Deuteronomy).
PrimevalHistory (Gen. 1–11)
Itis possible to divide Genesis into two parts based upon subjectmatter: the origin of creation and humankind’s call, fall, andpunishment (chaps 1–11), and the origin of a family that wouldbecome God’s conduit of salvation and blessing for the world(chaps. 12–50).
Theprimeval history comprises essentially the first eleven chapters ofGenesis, ending with the genealogy of Abraham in 11:26. Strictlyspeaking, 11:27 begins the patriarchal section with the sixthinstance of the toledot formula found in Genesis, referencingAbraham’s father, Terah. The Hebrew phrase ’elleh toledot(“these are the generations of”) occurs in eleven placesin Genesis and reflects a deliberate structural marker that one mayuse to divide the book into distinct episodes (2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1;11:10; 11:27; 25:12; 25:19; 36:1; 36:9; 37:2).
Genesisas we know it exhibits two distinct creation accounts in its firsttwo chapters. Although critical scholars contend that the differingaccounts reflect contradictory stories and different authors, it isjust as convenient to recognize that the two stories vary in styleand some content because they attempt to accomplish different aims.The first account, 1:1–2:3, is an artistic, poetic,symmetrical, and “heavenly” view of creation by atranscendent God, who spoke creation into being. In the secondaccount, 2:4–25, God is immanently involved with creation as heis present in a garden, breathes life into Adam’s nostrils,dialogues and problem-solves, fashions Eve from Adam’s side,and bestows warnings and commands. Both perspectives are foundationalfor providing an accurate view of God’s interaction withcreation in the rest of Scripture.
Asone progresses through chapters 1–11, the story quickly changesfrom what God has established as “very good” to discord,sin, and shame. Chapter 3 reflects the “fall” of humanityas Adam and Eve sin in eating from the forbidden tree in directdisobedience to God. The serpent shrewdly deceives the first couple,and thus all three incur God’s curses, which extend tounlimited generations. Sin that breaks the vertical relationshipbetween God and humanity intrinsically leads to horizontal strifebetween humans. Sin and disunity on the earth only intensify as onemoves from the murder story of Cain and Abel in chapter 4 to theflood in chapters 5–9. Violence, evil, and disorder have sopervaded the earth that God sends a deluge to wipe out all livingthings, save one righteous man and his family, along with an ark fullof animals. God makes the first covenant recorded in the biblicalnarrative with Noah (6:18), promising to save him from the flood ashe commands Noah to build an ark and gather food for survival. Noahfulfills all that God has commanded (6:22; 7:5), and God remembershis promise (8:1). This is the prototypical salvation story for therest of Scripture.
Chapter9 reflects a new start for humanity and all living things as thecreation mandate to “be fruitful and increase in number; fillthe earth and subdue it,” first introduced in 1:28, is restatedalong with the reminder that humankind is made in God’s image(1:27). Bearing the image involves new responsibilities andstipulations in the postdiluvian era (9:2–6). There will beenmity between humans and animals, animals are now appropriate food,and yet lifeblood will be specially revered. God still requiresaccountability for just and discriminate shedding of blood andorderly relationships, as he has proved in the deluge, but now herelinquishes this responsibility to humankind. In return, Godpromises never to destroy all flesh again, and he will set therainbow in the sky as a personal reminder. Like the covenant withNoah in 6:18, the postdiluvian covenant involves humankind fulfillingcommands (9:1–7) and God remembering his covenant (9:8–17),specially termed “everlasting” (9:16).
Theprimeval commentary on humankind’s unabating sinful condition(e.g., 6:5; 8:21) proves true as Noah becomes drunk and naked and hisson Ham (father of Canaan) shames him by failing to conceal hisfather’s negligence. Instead of multiplying, filling, andsubduing the earth as God has intended, humankind collaborates tomake a name for itself by building a sort of stairway to heavenwithin a special city (11:4). God foils such haughty plans byscattering the people across the earth and confusing their language.Expressed in an orderly chiastic structure, the story of the tower ofBabel demonstrates that God condescends (11:5) to set things straightwith humanity.
Patriarchs(Gen. 12–50)
Althoughthe primeval history is foundational for understanding the rest ofthe Bible, more space in Genesis is devoted to the patriarchalfigures Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph. In general, the Abrahamicnarrative spans chapters 12–25, the story of Isaac serves as atransition to the Jacob cycle of chapters 25–37, and the Josephnarrative finishes the book of Genesis in chapters 37–50.
Thetransition from the primeval history to the patriarchs (11:27–32)reveals how Abraham, the father of Israel, moves from the east andsettles in Harran as the family ventures to settle in Canaan. InHarran, Abraham receives the call of God’s redemptive plan,which reverberates through Scripture. God will bless him with land,make him a great nation, grant him special favor, and use him as aconduit of blessings to the world (12:1–3). In 11:30 is theindication that the barrenness of Abraham’s wife (Sarah)relates to the essence of God’s magnificent promises. How onebecomes great in name and number, secures enemy territory, and is tobless all peoples without a descendant becomes the compellingquestion of the Abrahamic narrative. The interchange betweenAbraham’s faith in God and his attempts to contrive covenantfulfillment colors the entire narrative leading up to chapter 22. Itis there that Abraham’s faith is ultimately put to the test asGod asks him to sacrifice the promised son, Isaac. Abraham passesGod’s faith test, and a ram is provided to take Isaac’splace. This everlasting covenant that was previously sealed by thesign of circumcision is climactically procured for future generationsthrough Abraham’s exemplary obedience (22:16–18; cf.15:1–21; 17:1–27).
Thepatriarchal stories that follow show that the Abrahamic promises arerenewed with subsequent generations (see 26:3–4; 28:13–14)and survive various threats to fulfillment. The story of Isaac servesmainly as a bridge to the Jacob cycle, as he exists primarily as apassive character in relation to Abraham and Jacob.
Deception,struggle, rivalry, and favoritism characterize the Jacob narrative,as first exemplified in the jostling of twin boys in Rebekah’swomb (25:22). Jacob supplants his twin brother, Esau, for thefirstborn’s blessing and birthright. He flees to Paddan Aram(northern Mesopotamia), marries two sisters, takes their maidservantsas concubines, and has eleven children, followed by a falling-outwith his father-in-law. Jacob’s struggle for God’sblessing that began with Esau comes to a head in his wrestlingencounter with God at Peniel. Ultimately, Jacob emerges victoriousand receives God’s blessing and a name change, “Israel”(“one who struggles with God”). Throughout the Jacobstory, God demonstrates his faithfulness to the Abrahamic covenantand reiterates the promises to Jacob, most notably at Bethel (chaps.28; 35). The interpersonal strife of Jacob’s life is thusenveloped within a message of reconciliation not just with Esau(chap. 33) but ultimately with God. The reader learns from theepisodes in Jacob’s life that although God works through thelives of weak and failing people, his promises for Israel remainsecure.
AlthoughJacob and his family are already living in Canaan, God intends forthem to move to Egypt and grow into a powerful nation beforefulfilling their conquest of the promised land (see 15:13–16).The story of Joseph explains how the family ends up in Egypt at theclose of Genesis. Joseph is specially loved by his father, whichelicits significant jealousy from his brothers, who sell him off tosome nomads and fabricate the alibi that he has been killed by a wildbeast. Joseph winds up in Pharaoh’s household and eventuallybecomes his top official. When famine strikes Canaan years later,Joseph’s brothers go to Egypt to purchase food from the royalcourt, and Joseph reveals his identity to them in an emotionalreunion. Jacob’s entire family moves to Egypt to live for atime in prosperity under Joseph’s care. The Joseph storyillustrates the mysterious relationship of human decision and divinesovereignty (50:20).
Liberationfrom Egypt (Exod. 1–18)
Genesisshows how Abraham develops into a large family. Exodus shows how thisfamily becomes a nation—enslaved, freed, and then taught theways of God. Although it appears that Exodus continues a rivetingstory of God’s chosen people, it is actually the identity andpower of God that take center stage.
Manyyears have passed since Joseph’s family arrived in Egypt. TheHebrews’ good standing in Egypt has also diminished as theirmultiplication and fruitfulness during the intervening period—justas God had promised Abraham (Gen. 17:4–8)—became anational threat to the Egyptians. Abraham’s family will spendtime in Egyptian slavery before being liberated with many possessionsin hand (cf. Gen. 15:13–14).
Inthe book of Exodus the drama of suffering and salvation serves as thevehicle for God’s self-disclosure to a single man, Moses. Mosesis an Israelite of destiny even from birth, as he providentiallyavoids infant death and rises to power and influence in Pharaoh’shousehold. Moses never loses his passion for his own people, and hekills an Egyptian who was beating a fellow Hebrew. Moses flees toobscurity in the desert, where he meets God and his call to lead hispeople out of Egypt and to the promised land (3:7–8; 6:8). Likethe days of Noah’s salvation, God has remembered his covenantwith the patriarchs and responded to the groans of his people inEgypt (2:24; 6:4–5; cf. Gen. 8:1). God reveals himself, and hispersonal name “Yahweh” (“I am”), to Moses inthe great theophany of the burning bush at Mount Horeb (Sinai), thesame place where later he will receive God’s law. Moses doubtshis own ability to carry out the task of confronting Pharaoh andleading the exodus, but God foretells that many amazing signs andwonders not only will make the escape possible but also willultimately reveal the mighty nature of God to the Hebrews, Egypt, andpresumably the world (6:7; 7:5).
Thispromise of creating a nation of his people through deliverance issuccinctly conveyed in the classic covenant formula that findssignificance in the rest of the OT: “I will take you as my ownpeople, and I will be your God” (6:7). Wielding great powerover nature and at times even human decision, God “hardens”Pharaoh’s heart and sends ten plagues to demonstrate his favorfor his own people and wrath against their enemy nation. The tenthplague on the firstborn of all in Egypt provides the context for thePassover as God spares the firstborn of Israel in response to theplacement of sacrificial blood on the doorposts of their homes.Pharaoh persists in the attempt to overtake the Israelites in thedesert, where the power of God climaxes in parting the Red Sea (orSea of Reeds). The Israelites successfully pass through, buttheEgyptian army drowns in pursuit. This is the great salvationevent of the OT.
Thesong of praise for God’s deliverance (15:1–21) quicklyturns to cries of groaning in the seventy days following the exodusas the people of the nation, grumbling about their circumstances inthe desert, quickly demonstrate their fleeting trust in the one whohas saved them (Exod. 15:22–18:27). When a shortage of waterand food confronts the people, their faith in God’s care provesshallow, and they turn on Moses. Even though the special marks ofGod’s protection have been evident in the wilderness throughthe pillars of cloud and fire, the angel of God, the provision ofmanna and quail, water from the rock, and the leadership of Moses,the nation continually fails God’s tests of trust and obedience(16:4; cf. 17:2; 20:20). Yet God continues to endure with his peoplethrough the leadership of Moses.
Sinai(Exod. 19:1–Num. 10:10)
Mostof the pentateuchal narrative takes place at Mount Sinai. It is therethat Israel receives national legislation and prescriptions for thetabernacle, the priesthood, feasts and festivals, and othercovenantal demands for living as God’s chosen people. Theeleven-month stay at Sinai takes the biblical reader through thecenter of the Pentateuch, covering approximately the last half ofExodus, all of Leviticus, and the first third of Numbers, before thenation leaves this sacred site and sojourns in the wilderness.Several key sections of the Pentateuch fall withinthe Sinaistory: the Decalogue (Exod. 20:1–17), the Book of the Covenant(Exod. 20:22–23:33), the tabernacle prescriptions (Exod.25–31), the tabernacle construction (Exod. 35–40), themanual on ritual worship (Lev. 1–7), and the Holiness Code(Lev. 17–27).
Theevents and instruction at Sinai are central to the Israelitereligious experience and reflect the third eternal covenant that Godestablishes in the Pentateuch—this time with Israel, wherebythe Sabbath is the sign (Exod. 31:16; cf. Noahic/rainbow covenant[Gen. 9:16] and the Abrahamic/circumcision covenant [Gen. 17:7, 13,19]). The offices of prophet and priest develop into clear view inthis portion of the Pentateuch. Moses exemplifies the dual propheticfunction of representing the people when speaking with God and, inturn, God when speaking to the people. The priesthood is bestowedupon Aaron and his descendants in Exodus and inaugurated within oneof the few narrative sections of Leviticus (Lev. 8–10). Thegiving of the law, the ark, the tabernacle, the priesthood, and theSabbath are all a part of God’s making himself “known”to Israel and the world, which is a constant theme in Exodus (see,e.g., 25:22; 29:43, 46; 31:13).
TheIsraelites’ stay at Sinai opens with one of the greatesttheophanies of the Bible: God speaks aloud to the people (Exod.19–20) and then is envisioned as a consuming fire (Exod. 24).After communicating the Ten Commandments (“ten words”)directly to the people (Exod. 34:28; Deut. 4:13; 10:4), Mosesmediates the rest of the detailed obligations that will govern thefuture life of the nation. The covenant is ratified in ceremonialfashion (Exod. 24), and the Israelites vow to fulfill all that hasbeen spoken. God expects Israel to be a holy nation (Exod. 19:6) withwhom he may dwell, but Moses descends Sinai only to find that theIsraelites have already violated the essence of the Decalogue byfashioning a golden calf to worship as that which delivered them fromEgypt (Exod. 32). This places Israel’s future and calling injeopardy, but Moses intercedes for his people, and God graciouslypromises to preserve the nation and abide with it in his mercy, evenwhile punishing the guilty. This becomes prototypical of God’srelationship with his people in the future (Exod. 34:6–7).
Exodusends with the consecration of the tabernacle and the descent of God’spresence there. With the tent of worship in order, the priesthood andits rituals can be officially established. Leviticus reflects divineinstructions for how a sinful people may live safely in closeproximity to God. Holy living involves dealing with sin andminimizing the need for atonement, purification, and restitution. Thesacrificial and worship system established in Leviticus is based on aworldview of order, perfection, and purity, which should characterizea people who are commanded, “Be holy because I, the Lord yourGod, am holy’ (Lev. 19:2; cf. 11:44–45; 20:26). Withthese rules in place, the Israelites can make final preparations todepart Sinai and move forward on their journey. Numbers 1–10spans a nineteen-day period of such activities as the Israelitesbegin to focus on dispossessing their enemies. These chapters reflecta census of fighting men, the priority of purity, the dedication ofthe tabernacle, and the observance of the Passover before commencingthe quest to Canaan.
WildernessJourney (Num. 10:11–36:13)
Therest of the book of Numbers covers the remainder of a forty-yearstretch of great peaks and valleys in the faith and future of thenation. Chapters 11–25 recount the various events that show theexodus generation’s lack of trust in God. Chapters 26–36reveal a more positive section whereby a new generation prepares forthe conquest. With the third section of Numbers framed by episodesinvolving the inheritance rights of Zelophehad’s daughters(27:1–11; 36:1–13), it is clear that the story has turnedtothe future possession of the land.
Afterthe departure from Sinai, the narrative consists of a number ofIsraelite complaints in the desert. The Israelites have grown tiredof manna and ironically crave the food of Egypt, which they recall asfree fish, fruits, and vegetables. Having forgotten the hardship oflife in slavery, about which they had cried out to God, now thenation is crying out for a lifestyle of old. Moses becomes sooverwhelmed with the complaints of the people that God providesseventy elders, who, to help shoulder the leadership burden, willreceive the same prophetic spirit given to Moses.
Inchapters 13–14 twelve spies are sent out from Kadesh Barnea toperuse Canaan, but the people’s lack of faith to procure theland from the mighty people there proves costly. This final exampleof distrust moves God to punish and purify the nation. Theunbelieving generation will die in the wilderness during a forty-yearperiod of wandering.
Thediscontent in the desert involves not only food and water but alsoleadership status. Moses’ own brother and sister resent hisspecial relationship with God and challenge his exclusive authority.Later, Aaron’s special high priesthood is threatened as anotherLevitical family (Korah) vies for preeminence. Through a sequence ofsigns and wonders, God makes it clear that Moses and Aaron haveexclusive roles in God’s economy. Due to the deaths related toKorah’s rebellion and the fruitless staffs that represent thetribes of Israel, the nation’s concern about sudden extinctionin the presence of a holy God is appeased through the eternalcovenant of priesthood granted to Aaron’s family (chap. 18). Heand the Levites, at the potential expense of their own lives and aspart of their priestly service, will be held accountable for keepingthe tabernacle pure of encroachers.
Evenafter the people’s significant rebellion and punishment, Godcontinues to prove his faithfulness to his word. Hope is restored forthe nation as the Abrahamic promises of blessing are rehearsed fromthe mouth of Balaam, a Mesopotamian seer. The Israelites will indeedone day be numerous (23:10), enjoy the presence of God (23:21), beblessed and protected (24:9), and have a kingly leader (24:17). Thiswonderful mountaintop experience of hope for the exodus generation istragically countered by an even greater event of apostasy in thesubsequent scene. Reminiscent of the incident of the golden calf,when pagan revelry in the camp had foiled Moses’ interactionwith God on Sinai, apostasy at the tabernacle undermines Balaam’soracles of covenant fulfillment. Fornication with Moabite women notonly joins the nation to a foreign god but also betrays God’sholiness at his place of dwelling. If not for the zeal of Aaron’sgrandson Phinehas, who puts an end to the sin, the ensuing plaguecould have finished the nation. For his righteous action, Phinehas isawarded an eternal priesthood and ensures a future for the nation andAaron’s priestly lineage.
Inchapter 26 a second census of fighting men indicates that the old,unbelieving exodus generation has officially died off (except forJoshua and Caleb), and God is proceeding with a new people. Goddispossesses the enemies of the new generation; reinstates the tribalboundaries of the land; reinstates rules concerning worship, service,and bloodshed; and places Joshua at the helm of leadership. Chapters26–36 mention no deaths or rebellions as the nationoptimistically ends its journey in Moab, just east of the promisedland.
Moses’Farewell (Deuteronomy)
Althoughone could reasonably move into the historical books at the end ofNumbers, much would be lost in overstepping Deuteronomy. Deuteronomypresents Moses’ farewell speeches as his final words to anation on the verge of Caanan. Moses’ speeches are best viewedas sermons motivating his people to embrace the Sinai covenant, lovetheir God, and choose life over death and blessings over cursings(30:19). Moses reviews the desert experience since Mount Horeb/Sinai(chaps. 1–4) and recapitulates God’s expectations forlawful living in the land (chaps. 5–26). The covenant code isrecorded on a scroll, is designated the “Book of the Law”(31:24–26), and is to be read and revered by the future king.Finally, Moses leads the nation in covenant renewal (chaps. 29–32)before the book finishes with an account of his death (chaps. 33–34),including tributes such as “since then, no prophet has risen inIsrael like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face” (34:10).
Deuteronomyreflects that true covenant faithfulness is achieved from a rightheart for God. If there were any previous doubts about the essence ofcovenant keeping, Moses eliminates such in Deuteronomy with thefrequent use of emotive terms. Loving God involves committing to himalone and spurning idols and foreign gods. The Ten Commandments(chap. 5) are not a list of stale requirements; they reflect thegreat Shema with the words “Love the Lord your God with allyour heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. Thesecommandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts”(6:5–6). God desires an unrivaled love from the nation, notcold and superficial religiosity.
Obedienceby the Israelites will incur material and spiritual blessing, whereasdisobedience ends in the loss of both. Although Moses stronglycommends covenant obedience, and the nation participates in acovenant-renewal ceremony (chap. 27), it is clear that in the futurethe Israelites will fail to uphold their covenant obligations andwill suffer the consequences (29:23; 30:1–4; 31:16–17).Yet Moses looks to a day when the command for circumcised hearts(10:16) will be fulfilled by the power of God himself (30:6). In thefuture a new king will arise from the nation (17:14–20) as wellas a prophet like Moses (18:15–22). Deuteronomy thusunderscores the extent of God’s own devotion to his patriarchalpromises despite the sinful nature of his people.
Formuch of the middle and end of the twentieth century, Deuteronomy hasreceived a significant amount of attention for its apparentresemblance in structure and content to ancient Hittite and Assyriantreaties. Scholars debate the extent of similarity, but it ispossible that Deuteronomy reflects a suzerain-vassal treaty formbetween Israel and God much like the common format between nations inthe ancient Near East. Although comparative investigation of thistype can be profitable for interpretation, it is prudent to beconservative when outlining direct parallels, since Deuteronomy isnot a legal document but rather a dramatic narrative of God’sredemptive interaction with the world.
Jesus Christ is the centerpiece of the Christian Scriptures. The meaning and interpretation of both Testaments is properly grasped only in light of the person and work of Jesus Christ. That is not to say that the Testaments testify to Jesus Christ in the exact same way; they obviously do not, but both Testaments are part of the inscripturated revelation that, in light of the incarnation, proclaims Jesus Christ to be the fullest manifestation of God given to humankind.
Old Testament
According to the Scriptures. The early Christians were adamant that the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ happened “according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:3–4), which meant that these events lined up with Israel’s sacred traditions. On the road to Emmaus the risen Jesus explained to the two travelers the things concerning himself “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets,” in relation to the death and glorification of the Messiah (Luke 24:27). In one of the major Johannine discourses, Jesus tells the Pharisees that the Scriptures “testify about me” (John 5:39). Early Christian authors could find certain key texts that demonstrated the conformity of the Christ-event to the pattern of Israel’s Scriptures, such as Pss. 2; 110; 118; Isa. 53. Yet much of the OT can be understood without mention of Jesus Christ in relation to its own historical context, and there is the danger of overly allegorizing OT texts in order to make them say something about Jesus Christ and the church.
The relationship between the Testaments. The way that the NT authors echo, allude to, quote, and interpret the OT is a complex matter, but at least two points need to be made about the relationship between the two Testaments.
First, the OT anticipates and illuminates the coming of Jesus Christ. “Anticipate” does not mean “predict,” but the law and the prophets foreshadow the offices and identity of Jesus Christ. The offices of prophet, priest, and king in the OT prefigure the ministry of Christ, who is the one who reveals God, intercedes on behalf of humankind, and is the Messiah and Lord. The sacrificial cultus, with the necessity of shedding blood for the removal of sin, prefigures the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ. This is why the law is a “shadow” of the one who was to come (Col. 2:17; Heb. 10:1). “Illuminate” means that certain OT texts, though not referring to Jesus in their historical or literary context, explain aspects of his person and work. This is seen most clearly in the way that the psalms are used in the NT. Texts such as Pss. 2:7; 110:1–4 provided biblical categories that explained the nature of Jesus’ sonship, the quality of his priestly ministry, and his installation as God’s vice-regent.
Second, we should differentiate between prophecy and typology. The prophetic promises in Ezek. 37; Amos 9; and Mic. 4 about a future Davidic king whom God will use to save and restore Israel are genuine prophecies that look forward to a future event yet to be fulfilled. These texts set forth the job description of the Messiah as the renewal and restoration of Israel from bondage and exile. It is unsurprising then that in Acts, James the brother of Jesus could cite Amos 9:11–12 as proof that Gentiles should be accepted into the people of God with the coming of the Messiah (Acts 15:15–18).
Typological interpretation, on the other hand, sees OT persons, places, or events as prototypes or patterns of NT persons, places, or events. For example, in Rom. 5:14 Paul says that Adam is a “type” or “pattern” of the one to come. Similarly, Matthew’s use of Isa. 7:14 in Matt. 1:23 is also typological rather than prophetic. In the context of Isaiah, the promise refers to a child born during the reign of King Ahaz as a sign that the Judean kingdom will survive the Assyrian onslaught. Matthew’s citation does not demand an exact correspondence of events as much as it postulates a correlation of patterns or types between Isaiah’s narrative and the Matthean birth story. The coming of God’s Son, the manifestation of God’s presence, and the rescue of Israel through a child born to a young girl bring to Matthew’s mind Isa. 7 as an obvious prophetic precedent, repeated at a new juncture of redemptive history.
A Christology of the Old Testament. The NT authors interpreted the OT in search of answers to questions pertaining to the identity and ministry of Jesus Christ, the nature of the people of God, and the arrival of the new age. They detected patterns in the OT that were repeated or recapitulated in Jesus’ own person. They proclaimed that the prophetic promises made to Israel had been made good in Jesus Christ, and they found allusions to the various events of his life, death, and exaltation. Jesus and Israel’s Scriptures became a mutually interpretive spiral whereby the Christians began to understand the OT in light of Jesus and understood Jesus in light of the OT. In this canonical setting we can legitimately develop a “Christology of the Old Testament.”
New Testament
The Gospels. The canonical Gospels are four ancient biographies that pay attention to the history and significance of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. They represent a testimony to Jesus and embody the collective memory of his person and actions as they were transmitted and interpreted by Christians in the Greco-Roman world of the mid- to late first century.
All four Gospels follow the same basic outline by variably detailing Jesus’ ministry, passion, and exaltation, and all of them place the story of Jesus in the context of the fulfillment of the story of Israel. At the same time, each Gospel in its plot and portrayal of Jesus remains distinctive in its own right. Yet they are not four different Jesuses, but rather four parallel portraits of Jesus, much like four stained-glass windows or four paintings depict the same person in different ways.
The Gospel of Matthew portrays Jesus as the long-awaited Davidic Messiah of Israel, with a focus on his teaching authority as a type of new Moses. The Gospel of Mark describes Jesus as the powerful Son of God and concurrently as the suffering Son of Man, whose cross reveals the reality of his identity and mission. The Gospel of Luke emphasizes Jesus’ role as an anointed prophet with a special concern for the poor and outcasts and his role as dispenser of the Holy Spirit. Without flattening the distinctive christological shape of each of the Synoptic Gospels, we could say that they focus on Jesus as the proclaimer of the kingdom of God and as king of the very same kingdom.
The Gospel of John has its own set of characteristic emphases in which Jesus’ consciousness of his divine nature and purpose is heightened. Programmatic for the entirety of John’s Gospel is the prologue in 1:1–18 about the “Word [who] became flesh,” which gives a clear theology of incarnation and revelation associated with Jesus’ coming. There is also much material unique to John’s Gospel, such as the “I am” statements that further exposit the nature of Jesus’ person and the climactic confession by Thomas that Jesus is “my Lord and my God” (20:28).
The Gospels indicate that mere knowledge that Jesus died for the purpose of salvation is an insufficient understanding of him. What is also needed, and what they provide, is an understanding of his teachings and his mission in light of Israel’s Scriptures and in view of the sociopolitical situation of Palestine. Jesus came to redeem and renew Israel so that a transformed Israel would transform the world.
Acts. The book of Acts contains the story of the emergence of the early church from Jerusalem to Rome. Even though Acts is a repository of apostolic preaching and plots the beginnings of the Gentile mission, it is the sequel to Luke’s Gospel and is very much the story of Jesus in perfect tense (i.e., a past event with ongoing significance). The most succinct summary of the Christology of Acts is in Peter’s speech in Jerusalem, where he states that “this Jesus” whom they crucified has been made both “Lord and Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” by God (2:36). In the succeeding narratives emphasis is given to “Jesus is the Christ [NIV: “Messiah”]” (e.g., 9:22; 17:3; 18:5), which is a message pertinent to Jews and Gentiles (20:21).
Paul’s Letters. The Pauline Epistles, although they are situational, pastoral, and not given primarily to christological exposition, still exhibit beliefs about Jesus held by Paul and his Christian contemporaries. The high points of Paul’s Christology can be detected in his use of traditional material such as Col. 1:15–20, which exposits the sufficiency and the supremacy of Christ. Philippians 2:5–11 narrates the story of the incarnation as an example of self-giving love. In 1 Cor. 8:6 Paul offers a Christianized version of the Shema of Deut. 6:4. There is a petition to Jesus as “Come, Lord!” in 1 Cor. 16:22. Paul can also refer to Jesus as God in Rom. 9:5 (although the grammar is ambiguous). For Paul, Jesus is both the “heavenly man” (1 Cor. 15:47–49) and the Son to come from heaven (1 Thess. 1:10). This interest in the divine Son of God does not mean that Paul was ignorant of or disinterested in the life and teachings of Jesus. Elsewhere he implies knowledge of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Rom. 14:14; 1 Cor. 7:10–11) and refers to the incarnation (e.g., 2 Cor. 8:9; Col. 2:9).
A number of titles are used to describe Jesus in Paul’s letters, including “Lord” and “Christ/Messiah” (and variations such as “Lord Jesus Christ” and “Christ Jesus”), “Savior,” and “Seed of David” (Rom. 1:3). But probably the most apt expression of Jesus’ nature according to Paul is “Son of God” (e.g., Rom. 1:4; 2 Cor. 1:19; Gal. 2:20). This language of sonship suggests that Jesus is the means of God’s salvation and glory and is the special agent through whom the Father acts. Referring to Jesus as “Son” also underscores Jesus’ unique relationship to God the Father and his unique role in executing the ordained plan of salvation for the elect.
We might also add that Paul provides the building blocks of what would later become a full-blown trinitarian theology, such as in the benediction of 2 Cor. 13:14 and in general exhortations about the gospel (1 Cor. 2:1–5). It must be emphasized that Paul’s Christology cannot be separated from his eschatology, soteriology, and ecclesiology. The sending of God’s Son (see Rom. 8:3; Gal. 4:4–5) into the world marks the coming of redemption and salvation through the cross and resurrection of the Son, and these are appropriated by faith. Those who believe become members of the restored Israel, the renewed Adamic race, and constituent members of the body of Christ. To that we might add the experiential element of Paul’s Christology as Jesus is known in the experience of salvation, prayer, and worship (e.g., Gal. 2:19–20).
The General Letters. The General Letters (also called the Catholic Epistles) provide a further array of images and explorations into the person and work of Jesus Christ and how they relate to the community of faith. The message of Hebrews is essentially “Jesus is better!” He is better than the angels and better than Moses; he is a better high priest; he offers a better sacrifice, establishes a better law, and instigates a better covenant. This letter is a sermonic exhortation against falling away from the faith (e.g., 2:1–4), and toward that end the author sets before his readers the magnificence of Jesus Christ, who is “the same yesterday and today and forever” (13:8).
James has little christological content and focuses instead on exhortations that bear remarkable resemblance to the teachings of Jesus from the Gospels. Even so, the letter makes passing reference to the “glorious Lord Jesus Christ” (2:1; cf. 1:1).
Central to 1 Peter is the glory and salvation that will be manifested at the revelation of Jesus Christ at his second coming (1:5, 7, 9, 13; 4:13; 5:1). Much attention is given to Jesus’ sacrificial death as a lamb (1:19), the example of his suffering (2:21–23; 4:1–2, 13), and the substitutionary nature of his death (2:24; 3:18). He is the Shepherd and Overseer of the souls of Christians (2:25). Peter writes this to encourage congregations in Asia Minor living under adverse conditions, and he sets before them the pattern of Jesus as a model for their own journey.
In 2 Peter we find a mix of Jewish eschatological concepts and Hellenistic religious language, with the author seeking to defend the apostolic gospel in a pagan culture. Jesus is the source of knowledge (1:2, 8; 2:20) and righteousness (1:1). Much emphasis is given to the coming kingdom of Jesus Christ (1:11, 16; 3:10). Jesus is the sustainer and renewer of the church and also the coming judge of the entire world.
Similar themes can be found in Jude, which is addressed to a group of believers who have been infiltrated by false teachers promoting licentiousness. Jude declares the infiltrators to be condemned and calls on the believers to hold fast to the faith. Jesus is the “Sovereign and Lord” (v. 4), Jesus saved people out of Egypt during the exodus (v. 5 [but see marginal notes on the variant reading “Lord”]), the second coming of Jesus will mark the revelation of his “mercy” (v. 21), and the benediction ascribes “glory, majesty, power and authority” to God through Jesus (v. 25). Most characteristic of all is the emphasis upon Jesus/God as the one who keeps the believers in the grip of his saving power (vv. 1, 21, 23).
The Letters of John take up where the Gospel of John left off, focusing on Jesus as the incarnate Word of God. The first of the three Johannine Epistles appears to have been written in a context where a community of Christians was being pressured by Jews to deny that Jesus is the Messiah (2:22) and also by dissident docetists to deny that Jesus had a physical body (4:2; 5:6). The major focus, however, is on Jesus as the Son of God (1:3, 7; 2:23; 3:8, 23; 4:9–10, 15; 5:11) and the incarnation of God’s very own truth and love (3:16; cf. 2 John 3).
Revelation. The Christology of the book of Revelation is best summed up in the opening description of Jesus as “him who is, and who was, and who is to come,” which underscores the lordship of Jesus over the past, present, and future. John then describes Jesus with the threefold titles “the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth” (1:4–5). In many ways, the story and Christology of Revelation are paradoxical. Jesus is both the victim of Roman violence and the victor over human evil. Jesus is the suffering “Lamb of God” and the powerful “Lion of the tribe of Judah.” In Rev. 4–5 we are given a picture of the worship in heaven and the enthronement of Jesus, and yet the realities on earth are a dearth of heavenly goodness, with persecution and apostasy rampant (Rev. 1–3). This tension continues until the final revelation of Jesus, when the heavenly Lord returns to bring the goodness and power of heaven to transform the perils of the earth and bring his people into the new Jerusalem.
Summary
The primary fixtures of a biblical Christology are (1) Jesus Christ is the promised deliverer intimated in Israel’s Scriptures, whose identity and mission are anticipated and illuminated by the law and the prophets; (2) the man Jesus of Nazareth is identified with the risen and exalted Lord Jesus Christ; and (3) Jesus participates in the very identity and being of God. See also Jesus Christ.
It is difficult to imagine a world without consistentmetrological systems. Society’s basic structures, from economyto law, require a uniform and accurate method for measuring time,distances, weights, volumes, and so on. In today’s world,technological advancements allow people to measure various aspects ofthe universe with incredible accuracy—from nanometers tolight-years, milligrams to kilograms.
Themetrological systems employed in biblical times span the sameconcepts as our own modern-day systems: weight, linear distance, andvolume or capacity. However, the systems of weights and measurementsemployed during the span of biblical times were not nearly asaccurate or uniform as the modern units employed today. Preexistingweight and measurement systems existed in the contextual surroundingsof both the OT and the NT authors and thus heavily influenced thesystems employed by the Israelite nation as well as the NT writers.There was great variance between the different standards usedmerchant to merchant (Gen. 23:16), city to city, region to region,time period to time period, even despite the commands to use honestscales and honest weights (Lev. 19:35–36; Deut. 25:13–15;Prov. 11:1; 16:11; 20:23; Ezek. 45:10).
Furthermore,inconsistencies and contradictions exist within the written recordsas well as between archaeological specimens. In addition, significantdifferences are found between preexilic and postexilic measurementsin the biblical texts, and an attempt at merging dry capacity andliquid volume measurements further complicated the issue. This is tobe expected, especially when we consider modern-dayinconsistencies—for example, 1 US liquid pint= 0.473liters, while 1 US dry pint= 0.550 liters. Thus, all modernequivalents given below are approximations, and even the bestestimates have a margin of error of + 5percent or more.
Weights
Weightsin biblical times were carried in a bag or a satchel (Deut. 25:13;Prov. 16:11; Mic. 6:11) and were stones, usually carved into variousanimal shapes for easy identification. Their side or flat bottom wasinscribed with the associated weight and unit of measurement.Thousands of historical artifacts, which differ by significantamounts, have been discovered by archaeologists and thus have greatlycomplicated the work of determining accurate modern-day equivalents.
Beka.Approximately 1⁄5 ounce, or 5.6 grams. Equivalent to 10 gerahsor ½ the sanctuary shekel (Exod. 38:26). Used to measuremetals and goods such as gold (Gen. 24:22).
Gerah.1⁄50 ounce, or 0.56 grams. Equivalent to 1⁄10 beka, 1⁄20shekel (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25).
Litra.Approximately 12 ounces, or 340 grams. A Roman measure of weight.Used only twice in the NT (John 12:3; 19:39). The precursor to themodern British pound.
Mina.Approximately 1¼ pounds, or 0.56 kilograms. Equivalent to 50shekels. Used to weigh gold (1Kings 10:17; Ezra 2:69), silver(Neh. 7:71–72), and other goods. The prophet Ezekiel redefinedthe proper weight: “Theshekel is to consist of twentygerahs. Twenty shekels plus twenty-five shekels plus fifteen shekelsequal one mina” (Ezek. 45:12). Before this redefinition, therewere arguably 50 shekels per mina. In Jesus’ parable of theservants, he describes the master entrusting to his three servantsvarying amounts—10 minas, 5 minas, 1 mina—implying amonetary value (Luke 19:11–24), probably of either silver orgold. One mina was equivalent to approximately three months’wages for a laborer.
Pim.Approximately 1⁄3 ounce, or 9.3 grams. Equivalent to 2⁄3shekel. Referenced only once in the Scriptures (1Sam. 13:21).
Shekel.Approximately 2⁄5 ounce, or 11 grams. Equivalent toapproximately 2 bekas. The shekel is the basic unit of weightmeasurement in Israelite history, though its actual weight variedsignificantly at different historical points. Examples include the“royal shekel” (2Sam. 14:26), the “commonshekel” (2Kings 7:1), and the “sanctuary shekel,”which was equivalent to 20 gerahs (e.g., Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25;Num. 3:47). Because it was used to weigh out silver or gold, theshekel also functioned as a common monetary unit in the NT world.
Talent.Approximately 75 pounds, or 34 kilograms. Equivalent to approximately60 minas. Various metals were weighed using talents: gold (Exod.25:39; 37:24; 1Chron. 20:2), silver (Exod. 38:27; 1Kings20:39; 2Kings 5:22), and bronze (Exod. 38:29). This probably isderived from the weight of a load that a man could carry.
Table12. Biblical Weights and Measures and Their Modern Equivalents:
Weights
Beka– 10 geraahs; ½ shekel = 1/5 ounce = 5.6 grams
Gerah– 1/10 beka; 1/20 shekel = 1/50 ounce = 0.56 grams
Litra– 12 ounces = 340 grams
Mina– 50 shekels = 1 ¼ pounds = 0.56 kilograms
Pim– 2/3 shekel = 1/3 ounce = 9.3 grams
Shekel– 2 bekas; 20 gerahs = 2/5 ounce = 11 grams
Talent– 60 minas = 75 pounds = 34 kilograms
Linearmeasurements
Cubit– 6 handbreadths = 18 inches = 45.7 centimeters
Day’sjourney = 20-25 miles = 32-40 kilometerse
Fingerbreadth– ¼ handbreadth = ¾ inch = 1.9 centimeterse
Handbreadth– 1/6 cubit = 3 inches = 7.6 centimeters
Milion– 1 mile = 1.6 kilometers
Orguia– 1/100 stadion = 5 feet 11 inches = 1.8 meters
Reed/rod– 108 inches = 274 centimeters
Sabbathday’s journey – 2,000 cubits = ¾ mile = 1.2kilometers
Span– 3 handbreadths = 9 inches = 22.8 centimeters
Stadion– 100 orguiai = 607 feet = 185 meters
Capacity
Cab– 1 omer = ½ gallon = 1.9 liters
Choinix– ¼ gallon = 0.9 liters
Cor– 1 homer; 10 ephahs = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Ephah– 10 omers; 1/10 homer = 3/5 bushel; 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Homer– 10 ephahs; 1 cor = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Koros– 10 bushels; 95 gallons – 360 liters
Omer– 1/10 ephah; 1/100 homer = 2 quarts = 1.9 liters
Saton– 1 seah = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
Seah– 1/3 ephah; 1 saton = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
LiquidVolume
Bath– 1 ephah = 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Batos– 8 gallons = 30.3 liters
Hin– 1/6 bath; 12 logs = 1 gallon; 4 quarts = 3.8 liters
Log– 1/72 bath; 1/12 hin = 1/3 quart = 0.3 liters
Metretes– 10 gallons = 37.8 literes
LinearMeasurements
Linearmeasurements were based upon readily available natural measurementssuch as the distance between the elbow and the hand or between thethumb and the little finger. While convenient, this method ofmeasurement gave rise to significant inconsistencies.
Cubit.Approximately 18 inches, or 45.7 centimeters. Equivalent to 6handbreadths. The standard biblical measure of linear distance, asthe shekel is the standard measurement of weight. The distance fromthe elbow to the outstretched fingertip. Used to describe height,width, length (Exod. 25:10), distance (John 21:8), and depth (Gen.7:20). Use of the cubit is ancient. For simple and approximateconversion into modern units, divide the number of cubits in half formeters, then multiply the number of meters by 3 to arrive at feet.
1cubit = 2 spans = 6 handbreadths = 24 fingerbreadths
Day’sjourney.An approximate measure of distance equivalent to about 20–25miles, or 32–40 kilometers. Several passages reference a singleor multiple days’ journey as a description of the distancetraveled or the distance between two points: “a day’sjourney” (Num. 11:31; 1Kings 19:4), “a three-dayjourney” (Gen. 30:36; Exod. 3:18; 8:27; Jon. 3:3), “sevendays” (Gen. 31:23), and “eleven days” (Deut. 1:2).After visiting Jerusalem for Passover, Jesus’ parents journeyedfor a day (Luke 2:44) before realizing that he was not with them.
Fingerbreadth.The width of the finger, or ¼ of a handbreadth, approximately¾ inch, or 1.9 centimeters. The fingerbreadth was thebeginning building block of the biblical metrological system forlinear measurements. Used only once in the Scriptures, to describethe bronze pillars (Jer. 52:21).
Handbreadth.Approximately 3 inches, or 7.6 centimeters. Equivalent to 1/6 cubit,or four fingerbreadths. Probably the width at the base of the fourfingers. A short measure of length, thus compared to a human’sbrief life (Ps. 39:5). Also the width of the rim on the bread table(Exod. 25:25) and the thickness of the bronze Sea (1Kings7:26).
Milion.Translated “mile” in Matt. 5:41. Greek transliteration ofRoman measurement mille passuum, “a thousand paces.”
Orguia.Approximately 5 feet 11 inches, or 1.8 meters. Also translated as“fathom.” A Greek unit of measurement. Probably thedistance between outstretched fingertip to fingertip. Used to measurethe depth of water (Acts 27:28).
Reed/rod.Approximately 108 inches, or 274 centimeters. This is also a generalterm for a measuring device rather than a specific linear distance(Ezek. 40:3, 5; 42:16–19; Rev. 11:1; 21:15).
Sabbathday’s journey.Approximately ¾ mile, or 1.2 kilometers (Acts 1:12). About2,000 cubits.
Span.Approximately 9 inches, or 22.8 centimeters. Equivalent to threehandbreadths, and ½ cubit. The distance from outstretchedthumb tip to little-finger tip. The length and width of the priest’sbreastpiece (Exod. 28:16).
Stadion.Approximately 607 feet, or 185 meters. Equivalent to 100 orguiai.Used in the measurement of large distances (Matt. 14:24; Luke 24:13;John 6:19; 11:18; Rev. 14:20; 21:16).
LandArea
Seed.The size of a piece of land could also be measured on the basis ofhow much seed was required to plant that field (Lev. 27:16; 1Kings18:32).
Yoke.Fields and lands were measured using logical, available means. Inbiblical times, this meant the amount of land a pair of yoked animalscould plow in one day (1Sam. 14:14; Isa. 5:10).
Capacity
Cab.Approximately ½ gallon, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1 omer.Mentioned only once in the Scriptures, during the siege of Samaria(2Kings 6:25).
Choinix.Approximately ¼ gallon, or 0.9 liters. A Greek measurement,mentioned only once in Scripture (Rev. 6:6).
Cor.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equal to thehomer, and to 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularlyof flour and grains (1Kings 4:22; 1Kings 5:11; 2Chron.2:10; 27:5; Ezra 7:22). In the LXX, cor is also a measure of liquidvolume, particularly oil (1Kings 5:11; 2Chron. 2:10; Ezra45:14).
Ephah.Approximately 3⁄5 bushel (6 gallons, or 22.7 liters).Equivalent to 10 omers, or 1⁄10 homer. Used for measuring flourand grains (e.g., Exod. 29:40; Lev. 6:20). Isaiah prophesied a day ofreduced agricultural yield, when a homer of seed would produce onlyan ephah of grain (Isa. 5:10). The ephah was equal in size to thebath (Ezek. 45:11), which typically was used for liquid measurements.
Homer.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equivalent to1 cor, or 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularly ofvarious grains (Lev. 27:16; Isa. 5:10; Ezek. 45:11, 13–14; Hos.3:2). This is probably a natural measure of the load that a donkeycan carry, in the range of 90 kilograms. There may have existed adirect link between capacity and monetary value, given Lev. 27:16:“fifty shekels of silver to a homer of barley seed.” Alogical deduction of capacity and cost based on known equivalencesmight look something like this:
1homer = 1 mina; 1 ephah = 5 shekels; 1 omer = 1 beka
Koros.Approximately 10 bushels (95 gallons, or 360 liters). A Greek measureof grain (Luke 16:7).
Omer.Approximately 2 quarts, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄10ephah, 1⁄100 homer (Ezek. 45:11). Used by Israel in themeasurement and collection of manna in the wilderness (Exod.16:16–36) and thus roughly equivalent to a person’s dailyfood ration.
Saton.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1 seah. Themeasurement of flour in Jesus’ parable of the kingdom of heaven(Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:21).
Seah.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄3 ephah,or 1 saton. Used to measure flour, grain, seed, and other various drygoods (e.g., 2Kings 7:1; 1Sam. 25:18).
LiquidVolume
Bath.Approximately 6 gallons, or 22.7 liters. Equivalent to 1 ephah, whichtypically was used for measurements of dry capacity. Used in themeasurement of water (1Kings 7:26), oil (1Kings 5:11),and wine (2Chron. 2:10; Isa. 5:10).
Batos.Approximately 8 gallons, or 30.3 liters. A Greek transliteration ofthe Hebrew word bath(see above). A measure of oil (Luke 16:6).
Hin.Approximately 4 quarts (1gallon, or 3.8 liters). Equivalent to1⁄6 bath and 12 logs. Used in the measurement of water (Ezek.4:11), oil (Ezek. 46:5), and wine (Num. 28:14).
Log.Approximately 1⁄3 quart, or 0.3 liter. Equivalent to 1⁄72bath and 1⁄12 hin. Mentioned five times in Scripture,specifically used to measure oil (Lev. 14:10–24).
Metretes.Approximately 10 gallons, or 37.8 liters. Used in the measurement ofwater at the wedding feast (John 2:6).
A collection of 150 poems. They are the hymnbook of the OTperiod, used in public worship. Psalms contains songs of differentlengths, types, and dates. The earliest psalm (Ps. 90) is attributedto Moses (mid-second millennium BC), while the content of Ps. 126 andPs. 137 points to the latest periods of the OT (mid-first millenniumBC). They continue to be used as a source of public worship andprivate devotion.
HistoricalBackground
Mostpsalms have a title. In the Hebrew text this title comprises thefirst verse, whereas English translations set it off before the firstverse. Titles vary. Many name an author (e.g., David [Ps. 3]; Asaph[Ps. 77]; sons of Korah [Ps. 42]), while others provide informationabout genre (e.g., Psalms of Ascent [Pss. 120–134]), tune(e.g., “Do Not Destroy” [Ps. 75]), use in worship (Ps.92), and a circumstance that led to composition (Ps. 51). Informationin the title gives hints concerning how psalms were written andbrought into a final collection.
Composition
Asmentioned, the titles of the psalms often give indications ofauthorship and occasionally name the circumstance that led to thewriting of the psalm. A good example is Ps. 51, where the titlestates, “For the director of music. A psalm of David. When theprophet Nathan came to him after David had committed adultery withBathsheba.” The title connects the psalm with the eventsrecorded in 2Sam. 11–12 and suggests that David wrote thesong in response to his sin and Nathan’s confrontation.
Althoughonly a handful of the psalms have such a historical title, it islikely that most psalms were composed in response to some specificcircumstance that encouraged the author to write. Interestingly,though, the psalmists do not speak about the specific circumstance inthe psalm itself. Psalm 51, for instance, fits perfectly with thesituation that the title describes in that it expresses guilt towardGod and asks for forgiveness, but nowhere does it speak specificallyabout adultery. The psalmists do this intentionally because they arewriting the song not as a memorial to an event, but rather as aprayer that others who have had similar though not identicalexperiences can use after them. Thus, Ps. 51 has been used as a modelprayer for many penitents, whether they have sinned like David or inanother way.
Mostmodern hymns have a similar background. John Newton, for instance,was inspired to write “Amazing Grace” because of awe thathe felt at his conversion to Christianity from the evil of being aslave trader. However, when he wrote it, he wanted others to sing itas reflecting not on his conversion but on their own.
Collection
Thepsalms were composed over a thousand-year period. Thus, it appearsthat the book of Psalms was a growing collection until it came to aclose at an unknown time between the writing of the two Testaments.
In1Chron. 16:7–36 we may get a glimpse of how the processworked. The text describes David turning a musical composition overto the Levitical musician Asaph and his associates. It is likely thatthe priests kept an official copy of the book of Psalms in the holyplace (the temple while it stood). The psalms, after all, were thehymns of ancient Israel. Their primary function was as a corporatebook of prayer, though certainly they could be used in privatedevotions (note Hannah’s prayer in 1Sam. 2:1–10 andits relationship to Ps. 113).
Organizationand Structure
Thepsalms have no obvious organization that explains the location of allthe psalms. They are not organized in terms of genre, authorship,time of composition, or length. There is only one statement aboutorganization, found in Ps. 72:20: “This concludes the prayersof David son of Jesse.” In the light of this comment, it issurprising that a number of Davidic psalms appear in subsequentsections (Pss. 101; 103; 108–110; 122; 124; 131; 133; 138–145).The best explanation is that at one point Ps. 72 concluded theDavidic psalms, but there was a reorganization before the canonicalorder was permanently closed.
Anumber of contemporary theories try to find some deep structure tothe book, but it is best to refrain from speculation in regard to theoverall structure. Nonetheless, a few structural characteristics areobvious. First, the division of Psalms into five books seems toreflect the fivefold division of the Pentateuch:
I.Book 1 (Pss. 1–41)
II.Book 2 (Pss. 42–72)
III.Book 3 (Pss. 73–89)
IV.Book 4 (Pss. 90–106)
V.Book 5 (Pss. 107–150)
Eachbook ends with a doxology. Such an intentional association with thePentateuch would lend support to the Psalter’s claim toauthority. Although these are prayers to God, they are also God’sword.
Second,within the Psalter there are subcollections. That is, there arepsalms that came into the book not individually but as a group. Thebest-known such group are the Psalms of Ascent (Pss. 120–134),probably so named because worshipers sang them while going up(ascending) to the Temple Mount during one of the annual religiousfestivals in Jerusalem.
Third,it appears that psalms are intentionally placed at the beginning andat the end of the book to serve as an introduction and a conclusion.Psalms 1–2 serve as an introduction that alerts the reader tothe twin important themes of law and messiah. Psalm 1 pronounces ablessing on those who love God’s law. The psalms, after all,are an intimate and personal conversation with God. One must be onthe side of the godly to enter such a holy textual space, just as onemust be godly to enter the precincts of the temple. After the readerenters, Psalm 2 provides an encounter with God and his anointed one(messiah). At the end of the book, the last five psalms (Pss.146–150) constitute a tremendous doxology of praise.
Thisleads to the final observation on structure. Psalms of lamentpredominate at the beginning of the book, but they give way to hymnsof praise toward the end. It is almost as if one enters the Psaltermourning and leaves it praising. Indeed, the Psalter brings thereader into contact with God and thus transforms the reader fromsadness to joy.
LiteraryConsiderations
Genre.The individual psalms may be identified as songs, prayers, or poems.Specifically, they are lyric poems (expressing the emotions of thepoet), often addressed to God, and set to musical accompaniment.Although the categories overlap, seven different types of psalms canbe recognized, with the first three being by far the most common.
• Lament.The largest single group of psalms are the laments, characterized bythe expression of unhappy emotions: sadness, disappointment, anger,worry. The lamenters call on God to save them, even while at timescomplaining about God’s actions toward them (Ps. 42:9–10).Some laments contain petitions for forgiveness (Ps. 51), while othersassert innocence of any wrongdoing (Ps. 26). A few laments evencontain curses directed toward the enemies who are trying to harm thepsalmist (Ps. 69:19–28). Most laments end by praising God orreaffirming confidence in God (Ps. 130:7–8). Usually the reasonfor the change from mourning to rejoicing is not given, but Ps. 77pinpoints the reason as the memory of God’s great salvationevents in the past (vv. 10, 16–20). One psalm, Ps. 88, lamentsbut never makes the turn, remaining in the pit of despair. Yet evenhere we have a glimmer of hope in that the one who laments is stillspeaking to God.
• Thanksgiving.When God answers a lament, the response is thanksgiving. Psalms ofthanksgiving are very similar to hymns (see below), but they cite anearlier problem that God has addressed. Psalm 30 praises God forrestoring the psalmist’s good fortune and health after hesuffered due to his earlier arrogance that led him to forget God (vv.6–7).
• Hymn.Hymns are psalms of unalloyed praise directed toward God. Thepsalmists often call for others to join their worship of God (Ps.100).
• Remembrance.While many psalms evoke memories of God’s actions in the past(as the lament in Ps. 77 recalls the exodus), certain psalms focus onrehearsing the actions of God in the past. Psalm 136 is one of themost memorable examples. As a liturgical psalm, it recites a divineaction (“[God] swept Pharaoh and his army into the Red Sea”[v.15]) followed by a congregational response (“His loveendures forever”).
• Confidence.These psalms are defined by their mood of quiet trust in God even inthe midst of trouble. They often present a reassuring image of God.The picture of God as a shepherd in Ps. 23 or as a mother in Ps. 131are good examples.
• Wisdom.Some psalms meditate on the law (Pss. 1; 119) or have interestssimilar to those of wisdom literature, such as Job, Proverbs, andEcclesiastes (Pss. 49; 73).
• Kingship.A number of psalms praise God as king (Ps. 47) or the human king ashis agent (Pss. 20–21) or both (Ps.2).
Style.The psalms are poems, and so their style is characterized by the useof parallelism and figurative language. Poetry is also notable forits short lines. A poet packs a lot of meaning into very few words.So it is important to slow down and reflect on a psalm in order toderive its maximum effect. Besides brevity of expression,parallelism, and figurative language, poets create interest by usingother literary tools. The psalmists use these poetic devices not onlyto inform their readers’ intellect but also to stimulate theirimagination and arouse their emotions. (See also Acrostic; Imagery;Poetry.)
TheologicalMessage
Althoughthe psalms are not theological essays, readers can learn about Godand their relationship with God from these poems. The book of Psalmsis a bit like a portrait gallery of God, using images to describe whohe is and the nature of our relationship with him. Some examplesinclude God as shepherd (Ps. 23), king (Ps. 47), warrior (Ps. 98),and mother (Ps. 131), and the list could be greatly expanded. Eachone of these picture images casts light on the nature of God and alsothe nature of our relationship with God. After all, theaforementioned psalms explicitly or implicitly describe God’speople as sheep, subjects, soldiers, and children.
Connectionto the New Testament and Today
Jesushimself draws attention to Psalms as a book that anticipated hiscoming suffering and glorification (Luke 24:25–27, 44). TheGospels recognized that Jesus’ zeal for God was well expressedby Ps. 69:9 (John 2:17). When at the apex of his suffering on thecross, Jesus uttered the words found in Ps. 22:1 (Matt. 27:46). TheNT writers also saw that Jesus was the fulfillment of the covenantthat promised that a son of David would have an everlasting throne(2Sam. 7:16). Accordingly, the royal psalms (e.g., Pss. 2; 110)often were applied to Jesus, who is the Messiah (the Christ, “theanointed one”).
Todaywe read Psalms not only as an ancient witness to the coming work ofChrist but also, as John Calvin put it, as a mirror of our souls. Thepsalms were written for worshipers who came after them with similarthough not identical joys and problems. The psalms should becomemodels of our prayers.
It is difficult to imagine a world without consistentmetrological systems. Society’s basic structures, from economyto law, require a uniform and accurate method for measuring time,distances, weights, volumes, and so on. In today’s world,technological advancements allow people to measure various aspects ofthe universe with incredible accuracy—from nanometers tolight-years, milligrams to kilograms.
Themetrological systems employed in biblical times span the sameconcepts as our own modern-day systems: weight, linear distance, andvolume or capacity. However, the systems of weights and measurementsemployed during the span of biblical times were not nearly asaccurate or uniform as the modern units employed today. Preexistingweight and measurement systems existed in the contextual surroundingsof both the OT and the NT authors and thus heavily influenced thesystems employed by the Israelite nation as well as the NT writers.There was great variance between the different standards usedmerchant to merchant (Gen. 23:16), city to city, region to region,time period to time period, even despite the commands to use honestscales and honest weights (Lev. 19:35–36; Deut. 25:13–15;Prov. 11:1; 16:11; 20:23; Ezek. 45:10).
Furthermore,inconsistencies and contradictions exist within the written recordsas well as between archaeological specimens. In addition, significantdifferences are found between preexilic and postexilic measurementsin the biblical texts, and an attempt at merging dry capacity andliquid volume measurements further complicated the issue. This is tobe expected, especially when we consider modern-dayinconsistencies—for example, 1 US liquid pint= 0.473liters, while 1 US dry pint= 0.550 liters. Thus, all modernequivalents given below are approximations, and even the bestestimates have a margin of error of + 5percent or more.
Weights
Weightsin biblical times were carried in a bag or a satchel (Deut. 25:13;Prov. 16:11; Mic. 6:11) and were stones, usually carved into variousanimal shapes for easy identification. Their side or flat bottom wasinscribed with the associated weight and unit of measurement.Thousands of historical artifacts, which differ by significantamounts, have been discovered by archaeologists and thus have greatlycomplicated the work of determining accurate modern-day equivalents.
Beka.Approximately 1⁄5 ounce, or 5.6 grams. Equivalent to 10 gerahsor ½ the sanctuary shekel (Exod. 38:26). Used to measuremetals and goods such as gold (Gen. 24:22).
Gerah.1⁄50 ounce, or 0.56 grams. Equivalent to 1⁄10 beka, 1⁄20shekel (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25).
Litra.Approximately 12 ounces, or 340 grams. A Roman measure of weight.Used only twice in the NT (John 12:3; 19:39). The precursor to themodern British pound.
Mina.Approximately 1¼ pounds, or 0.56 kilograms. Equivalent to 50shekels. Used to weigh gold (1Kings 10:17; Ezra 2:69), silver(Neh. 7:71–72), and other goods. The prophet Ezekiel redefinedthe proper weight: “Theshekel is to consist of twentygerahs. Twenty shekels plus twenty-five shekels plus fifteen shekelsequal one mina” (Ezek. 45:12). Before this redefinition, therewere arguably 50 shekels per mina. In Jesus’ parable of theservants, he describes the master entrusting to his three servantsvarying amounts—10 minas, 5 minas, 1 mina—implying amonetary value (Luke 19:11–24), probably of either silver orgold. One mina was equivalent to approximately three months’wages for a laborer.
Pim.Approximately 1⁄3 ounce, or 9.3 grams. Equivalent to 2⁄3shekel. Referenced only once in the Scriptures (1Sam. 13:21).
Shekel.Approximately 2⁄5 ounce, or 11 grams. Equivalent toapproximately 2 bekas. The shekel is the basic unit of weightmeasurement in Israelite history, though its actual weight variedsignificantly at different historical points. Examples include the“royal shekel” (2Sam. 14:26), the “commonshekel” (2Kings 7:1), and the “sanctuary shekel,”which was equivalent to 20 gerahs (e.g., Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25;Num. 3:47). Because it was used to weigh out silver or gold, theshekel also functioned as a common monetary unit in the NT world.
Talent.Approximately 75 pounds, or 34 kilograms. Equivalent to approximately60 minas. Various metals were weighed using talents: gold (Exod.25:39; 37:24; 1Chron. 20:2), silver (Exod. 38:27; 1Kings20:39; 2Kings 5:22), and bronze (Exod. 38:29). This probably isderived from the weight of a load that a man could carry.
Table12. Biblical Weights and Measures and Their Modern Equivalents:
Weights
Beka– 10 geraahs; ½ shekel = 1/5 ounce = 5.6 grams
Gerah– 1/10 beka; 1/20 shekel = 1/50 ounce = 0.56 grams
Litra– 12 ounces = 340 grams
Mina– 50 shekels = 1 ¼ pounds = 0.56 kilograms
Pim– 2/3 shekel = 1/3 ounce = 9.3 grams
Shekel– 2 bekas; 20 gerahs = 2/5 ounce = 11 grams
Talent– 60 minas = 75 pounds = 34 kilograms
Linearmeasurements
Cubit– 6 handbreadths = 18 inches = 45.7 centimeters
Day’sjourney = 20-25 miles = 32-40 kilometerse
Fingerbreadth– ¼ handbreadth = ¾ inch = 1.9 centimeterse
Handbreadth– 1/6 cubit = 3 inches = 7.6 centimeters
Milion– 1 mile = 1.6 kilometers
Orguia– 1/100 stadion = 5 feet 11 inches = 1.8 meters
Reed/rod– 108 inches = 274 centimeters
Sabbathday’s journey – 2,000 cubits = ¾ mile = 1.2kilometers
Span– 3 handbreadths = 9 inches = 22.8 centimeters
Stadion– 100 orguiai = 607 feet = 185 meters
Capacity
Cab– 1 omer = ½ gallon = 1.9 liters
Choinix– ¼ gallon = 0.9 liters
Cor– 1 homer; 10 ephahs = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Ephah– 10 omers; 1/10 homer = 3/5 bushel; 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Homer– 10 ephahs; 1 cor = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Koros– 10 bushels; 95 gallons – 360 liters
Omer– 1/10 ephah; 1/100 homer = 2 quarts = 1.9 liters
Saton– 1 seah = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
Seah– 1/3 ephah; 1 saton = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
LiquidVolume
Bath– 1 ephah = 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Batos– 8 gallons = 30.3 liters
Hin– 1/6 bath; 12 logs = 1 gallon; 4 quarts = 3.8 liters
Log– 1/72 bath; 1/12 hin = 1/3 quart = 0.3 liters
Metretes– 10 gallons = 37.8 literes
LinearMeasurements
Linearmeasurements were based upon readily available natural measurementssuch as the distance between the elbow and the hand or between thethumb and the little finger. While convenient, this method ofmeasurement gave rise to significant inconsistencies.
Cubit.Approximately 18 inches, or 45.7 centimeters. Equivalent to 6handbreadths. The standard biblical measure of linear distance, asthe shekel is the standard measurement of weight. The distance fromthe elbow to the outstretched fingertip. Used to describe height,width, length (Exod. 25:10), distance (John 21:8), and depth (Gen.7:20). Use of the cubit is ancient. For simple and approximateconversion into modern units, divide the number of cubits in half formeters, then multiply the number of meters by 3 to arrive at feet.
1cubit = 2 spans = 6 handbreadths = 24 fingerbreadths
Day’sjourney.An approximate measure of distance equivalent to about 20–25miles, or 32–40 kilometers. Several passages reference a singleor multiple days’ journey as a description of the distancetraveled or the distance between two points: “a day’sjourney” (Num. 11:31; 1Kings 19:4), “a three-dayjourney” (Gen. 30:36; Exod. 3:18; 8:27; Jon. 3:3), “sevendays” (Gen. 31:23), and “eleven days” (Deut. 1:2).After visiting Jerusalem for Passover, Jesus’ parents journeyedfor a day (Luke 2:44) before realizing that he was not with them.
Fingerbreadth.The width of the finger, or ¼ of a handbreadth, approximately¾ inch, or 1.9 centimeters. The fingerbreadth was thebeginning building block of the biblical metrological system forlinear measurements. Used only once in the Scriptures, to describethe bronze pillars (Jer. 52:21).
Handbreadth.Approximately 3 inches, or 7.6 centimeters. Equivalent to 1/6 cubit,or four fingerbreadths. Probably the width at the base of the fourfingers. A short measure of length, thus compared to a human’sbrief life (Ps. 39:5). Also the width of the rim on the bread table(Exod. 25:25) and the thickness of the bronze Sea (1Kings7:26).
Milion.Translated “mile” in Matt. 5:41. Greek transliteration ofRoman measurement mille passuum, “a thousand paces.”
Orguia.Approximately 5 feet 11 inches, or 1.8 meters. Also translated as“fathom.” A Greek unit of measurement. Probably thedistance between outstretched fingertip to fingertip. Used to measurethe depth of water (Acts 27:28).
Reed/rod.Approximately 108 inches, or 274 centimeters. This is also a generalterm for a measuring device rather than a specific linear distance(Ezek. 40:3, 5; 42:16–19; Rev. 11:1; 21:15).
Sabbathday’s journey.Approximately ¾ mile, or 1.2 kilometers (Acts 1:12). About2,000 cubits.
Span.Approximately 9 inches, or 22.8 centimeters. Equivalent to threehandbreadths, and ½ cubit. The distance from outstretchedthumb tip to little-finger tip. The length and width of the priest’sbreastpiece (Exod. 28:16).
Stadion.Approximately 607 feet, or 185 meters. Equivalent to 100 orguiai.Used in the measurement of large distances (Matt. 14:24; Luke 24:13;John 6:19; 11:18; Rev. 14:20; 21:16).
LandArea
Seed.The size of a piece of land could also be measured on the basis ofhow much seed was required to plant that field (Lev. 27:16; 1Kings18:32).
Yoke.Fields and lands were measured using logical, available means. Inbiblical times, this meant the amount of land a pair of yoked animalscould plow in one day (1Sam. 14:14; Isa. 5:10).
Capacity
Cab.Approximately ½ gallon, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1 omer.Mentioned only once in the Scriptures, during the siege of Samaria(2Kings 6:25).
Choinix.Approximately ¼ gallon, or 0.9 liters. A Greek measurement,mentioned only once in Scripture (Rev. 6:6).
Cor.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equal to thehomer, and to 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularlyof flour and grains (1Kings 4:22; 1Kings 5:11; 2Chron.2:10; 27:5; Ezra 7:22). In the LXX, cor is also a measure of liquidvolume, particularly oil (1Kings 5:11; 2Chron. 2:10; Ezra45:14).
Ephah.Approximately 3⁄5 bushel (6 gallons, or 22.7 liters).Equivalent to 10 omers, or 1⁄10 homer. Used for measuring flourand grains (e.g., Exod. 29:40; Lev. 6:20). Isaiah prophesied a day ofreduced agricultural yield, when a homer of seed would produce onlyan ephah of grain (Isa. 5:10). The ephah was equal in size to thebath (Ezek. 45:11), which typically was used for liquid measurements.
Homer.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equivalent to1 cor, or 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularly ofvarious grains (Lev. 27:16; Isa. 5:10; Ezek. 45:11, 13–14; Hos.3:2). This is probably a natural measure of the load that a donkeycan carry, in the range of 90 kilograms. There may have existed adirect link between capacity and monetary value, given Lev. 27:16:“fifty shekels of silver to a homer of barley seed.” Alogical deduction of capacity and cost based on known equivalencesmight look something like this:
1homer = 1 mina; 1 ephah = 5 shekels; 1 omer = 1 beka
Koros.Approximately 10 bushels (95 gallons, or 360 liters). A Greek measureof grain (Luke 16:7).
Omer.Approximately 2 quarts, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄10ephah, 1⁄100 homer (Ezek. 45:11). Used by Israel in themeasurement and collection of manna in the wilderness (Exod.16:16–36) and thus roughly equivalent to a person’s dailyfood ration.
Saton.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1 seah. Themeasurement of flour in Jesus’ parable of the kingdom of heaven(Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:21).
Seah.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄3 ephah,or 1 saton. Used to measure flour, grain, seed, and other various drygoods (e.g., 2Kings 7:1; 1Sam. 25:18).
LiquidVolume
Bath.Approximately 6 gallons, or 22.7 liters. Equivalent to 1 ephah, whichtypically was used for measurements of dry capacity. Used in themeasurement of water (1Kings 7:26), oil (1Kings 5:11),and wine (2Chron. 2:10; Isa. 5:10).
Batos.Approximately 8 gallons, or 30.3 liters. A Greek transliteration ofthe Hebrew word bath(see above). A measure of oil (Luke 16:6).
Hin.Approximately 4 quarts (1gallon, or 3.8 liters). Equivalent to1⁄6 bath and 12 logs. Used in the measurement of water (Ezek.4:11), oil (Ezek. 46:5), and wine (Num. 28:14).
Log.Approximately 1⁄3 quart, or 0.3 liter. Equivalent to 1⁄72bath and 1⁄12 hin. Mentioned five times in Scripture,specifically used to measure oil (Lev. 14:10–24).
Metretes.Approximately 10 gallons, or 37.8 liters. Used in the measurement ofwater at the wedding feast (John 2:6).
Until the twentieth century, traveling farther than a week’sdistance from home was dangerous and expensive. We should notoverstate the difficulty or risks of travel then, but certainly itwas unlike today. Since virtually every region had its own currency,travelers carried cash and were at risk from thieves, money changers,innkeepers, slavers, and others who preyed upon travelers, as well asfrom the natural dangers of storms, floods, early snows, and soforth. Outside of cities, there was little law enforcement for thetypical traveler (Ezra 8:22). Family was often one’s onlydefender against injustice (Gen. 14:12–16; Ps. 127:3–5).
Fortravelers in the biblical world, improvement was slow and gradual.During the time of the patriarchs, travelers faced poor roads,bandits, and no security other than what they could providethemselves (Gen. 14:14). Later Assyrian documents complain ofdifficult roads. SargonII (r. 722–705 BC) boasted, “Iadvanced over inaccessible paths (in) steep and terrifying places”(ARAB 2:25–26). Sennacherib (r. 705–681 BC) tells ofhaving to travel on foot because the road was too steep for hislitter (ARAB 2:122–23). Persian roads improved modestly, butHerodotus probably is exaggerating the improvements (Hist. 8.98), asXenophon seems to indicate (Anab. 1.2.25). Many sources speak ofbandits (Ezra 8:31; Hos. 6:9). Thus, safe travel or good roads becamea metaphor for peace. When ancient kings bragged, it often was aboutroads they had built or how the roads were now safe. The arrival ofthe kingdom of God was symbolized by repairing the road (Isa. 40:3–5;Luke 3:4–6).
Majorimprovements came with the Roman Empire. For the first (and last)time, a traveler could go from the Euphrates to Egypt to Britain onwell-policed roads and sea lanes under one’s own government.Enforced law and standardized, trustworthy coinage had distinctadvantages (Isa. 33:8; Matt. 22:15–22).
Runningempires required traveling. Envoys (Jer. 27:3), tax collectors (Dan.11:20), and overseers (1Kings 5:13–17), as well asarmies, moved about on imperial business. While farmers and localmerchants traveled limited distances to sell their wares (usually tothe closest large city), fortunes could be made by the moreadventuresome merchant willing to take the greater risks of travelingfarther distances (Gen. 37:28; 1Kings 10; Job 6:19; Prov.31:14; Isa. 23:8; Matt. 13:45). The ancient world also sawindividuals doing a great deal of local travel (less than sixtymiles), usually connected to business (Prov. 31:14), religiousfestivals (1Sam. 1; John 10), and family (Gen. 50:1–14;2Kings 8:29; Luke 1:39; John 2:1); often the three were woventogether.
Travelin the ancient world was by sea or land. Except for the wealthy, thismeant booking passage or walking. Sentimental images of a pregnantMary riding a donkey to Bethlehem or of the apostle Paul doingmissionary travels on horseback are likely fiction. Although there issome evidence of women traveling on donkeys (Josh. 15:18; 1Sam.25:20, 23; 2Sam. 16:1–2), the stories are of prominentwomen or unusual occasions; it should not be assumed to be normative.Obviously, the infirm rode when required to travel, but theypreferred not to travel (2Sam. 19:26–37). The wealthiestused private transport (Acts 8:27–28). We have references totravel by donkey, mule, camel, horse, cart, litter, and chariot, butordinary people walked. Typically, a good day’s walk was twentymiles; sea travel was by daylight and averaged roughly the same.Calculating how long it took someone to travel, though, is not merelya matter of math. Both sea and land travelers were fair-weathertravelers, usually between June and September. On a long journey, onehad to plan where to “winter.” Ancient travelers had tomake their travel plans around the seasons.
Travelby Land
Roads.Until the Romans, a “road” was merely a cleared path.They were ungraded and often impassable in wet weather. Nonetheless,they followed a distinct route, marked by “guideposts”(Jer. 31:21). In the ancient world, major roads ran east-west fromSyria into Mesopotamia. North-south roads connected Syria to Egypt,through Palestine. The Assyrian army invaded Israel by traveling weston the road as far as Syria and then turning south. The battlesfought in Gen. 14 were to control the north-south road (and thustrade). Solomon built wealth by controlling this trade (2Chron.9:14). Three major roads ran north-south through Israel. (1)TheKing’s Highway (Num. 20:17) ran through the eastern region,from Damascus through the eastern highlands of the Transjordan anddown to the Gulf of Aqaba, where Solomon maintained a port (2Chron.8:17). (2)The central (or Sinai) road ran from Sidon south toTyre, Akko, Shechem, Jerusalem, Hebron, Beersheba, Kadesh Barnea,into the Negev, and on to Egypt. (3)The Sea Road (Via Maris)ran from Damascus to Hazor through the Valley of Jezreel (the Plainof Esdraelon through the Megiddo Pass), down the coast of Israelthrough Gaza and into Egypt. Taking Megiddo meant controlling thisroad and the trade. The Egyptians (ThutmoseIII) defeated theCanaanites and took this road around 1468 BC. David captured it about1000 BC. Josiah died defending this road against the Egyptians(NechoII) in 609 BC.
TheGreeks extended a major road connecting through Asia Minor to theancient road running into Mesopotamia. The Romans built roads of flatstone placed upon foundations. Parts of these roads are still in usetoday. From Rome they built to the sea (Via Ostiensis, ViaPortuensis), to the south (Via Appia), to the west (Via Aurelia), tothe north (Via Flaminia), to the Adriatic (Via Salaria, Via Valeria),and to the east (Via Ignatia) connecting Rome to Greece and thus tothe rest of the biblical world.
Lodgings.Land travel necessitated lodgings. The wealthy near Rome often hadhomes along the common routes that they plied. Slaves ran ahead toannounce that the master was coming. Friends and those on themaster’s business likely used these homes as well whentraveling. When off the normal route, an aristocrat traveled with aretinue of servants, wagons, and tents to enable a well-equipped (andsecure) camp each evening. The ordinary traveler had no extra homesor entourages. Groups large enough for safety could camp near town.Individuals relied upon hospitality in town. Those individualtravelers unfortunate to lack any kinship with townsfolk often had norecourse but inns. Petronius (Sat. 94–97) tells a seamy storyof misadventures in the roadside inns of his day. Archaeology andliterature describe ill-kept dumps involving disreputableproprietors, questionable guests, and plenty of loose morals. AncientHebrews and early Christians emphasized hospitality (Gen. 19:1–2;Judg. 19:11–20; Rom. 12:13; 1Pet. 4:9; 3John 8).
Distanceand duration.Using the distances between ancient stopping places, travel records,and comments in literary sources, scholars generally agree that anormal walking traveler could expect to cover twenty miles in a day.Peter’s trip from Joppa to Caesarea (about forty miles) tooktwo days (Acts 10:23–30). Travelers using beasts of burdengenerally covered the same distance. Chariots averaged a bit better,perhaps twenty-five to thirty miles per day. Whether they actuallytraveled farther or just stopped earlier for the night is debatable.Horseback was intended for speed and could easily average fifty milesper day. Yet we must avoid the mistake of calculating travel timebetween places by simple math. While such calculations generally holdtrue for one- or two-day journeys (Acts 10), longer journeysencountered delays. Towns along main roads were commonly spaced aday’s walk apart. Yet it is unwise to assume that a traveleralways left the next morning after an overnight stay. Jesus warnedhis traveling preachers against such rudeness (Luke 10:5–7).Moreover, the host likely provided the food supplies and extra fundsfor the traveler’s next walk (3John 5–8; Did.11.5–6). Certainly, Jewish travelers were affected by Sabbathsand feasts. Not only would they not travel on those days, but alsothey likely would delay or rush to reach a particular location (Acts20:2–5, 16; 1Cor. 16:8). Ancients traveled according to adifferent tempo than modern Westerners.
Seasonscaused more serious delays. When traveling season ended, travelerswere forced to spend the winter wherever they were at that time. Ifpossible, they did not leave this to chance but rather planned whereto “winter” (Jer. 36:22; Acts 27:12; 1Cor. 16:6;Titus 3:12). Terrain was a serious consideration. Mountain passes andriver fords were obvious factors, and ancients often took the easier(or safer) though longer path. Hence, there were three roads leadingfrom Perga to Pisidian Antioch, the longest (western) being thesafest and easiest. Uphill journeys, snow-blocked passes, and flashfloods slowed ancient travelers, sometimes stranding them longer thantheir planned supplies would last (2Cor. 6:5).
Travelingin groups. Sincetravelers carried money, they avoided traveling alone or in verysmall groups. (The so-called wise men of Matt. 2:1–12 almostcertainly would have been waylaid had there been only three of them.)Commonly, travelers gathered in the agora (marketplace) early in themorning looking for fellow travelers heading their way, thus makingtraveling companions of those with whom they might not normallyassociate (Luke 9:57; 14:25). It was also common for travelers tojoin others along the road (Luke 24:13–16; Acts 8:27–30).
Travelby Sea
Ships.Almost all ancient ships were wooden. A “fast ship” wasnot necessarily a sleeker mode, but a dry one. Ideally, ships werestored out of the water during winter. Waterlogged ships werenaturally slower.
Nobiblical empire was worth its salt unless it had naval supremacy inthe Mediterranean Sea. Sailing vessels were at the mercy of the wind,so military ships meant galley ships. Rowing allowed captains to movewithout the wind. Today, we tend to imagine rowers like the “galleyslaves” of the Middle Ages. Ancient rowers, however, werehonored soldiers. Ships rammed each other in battle, and skill at theoar often meant the difference between victory and death. Once theenemy was rammed, rowers sprang up from their oars and fought hand tohand.
Piracyand commerce.No one could claim dominance of the sea without controlling piracy.The Roman navy, for the first time in history, managed to virtuallyeliminate piracy. Roman archers and slingers rained destruction asthey drew near pirate vessels. Catapults later were added for heavyartillery. Finally, firepots slung out on long poles set fire to theenemy’s ship, which the Romans then rammed and boarded.
Withthe taming of the Mediterranean, commercial shipping exploded ingrowth. Transporting cargo, passengers, and dispatches becameprofitable business. Smaller ships (like a Galilean fishing boat)depended upon oars, with a small sail as an auxiliary. Largermerchant ships depended more on sails. Sailing ships, with favorablewinds, probably averaged between two and four miles per hour, butonly half that with unfavorable winds. Ancient ships huggedcoastlines and avoided bad weather.
Commoncargo ships carried an average of about 250 tons of cargo and/orpassengers and ranged from 70 to 150 feet in length. Those carrying350 to 500 tons were considered large but not rare. It is thoughtthat the grain ships in Paul’s day (as in Acts 27) routinelywere three-decked, 180 feet long, carried 1,300 tons, and took over aweek to unload.
Travelingby ship.Although cargo ships also carried passengers, some ships wereprimarily for passengers. Josephus, on an unsuccessful attempt tosail to Rome, was on a ship with six hundred passengers (Josephus,Life 15). Sallust, a Roman historian, mentions a cohort (about 600men) traveling on one transport ship (Hist. 3.8). Paul’s shipto Rome had 276 aboard (Acts 27:37). Acts gives the impression thatthis ship left too late in the season. Aside from those compelled byRome, likely only the brave or the desperate would book such passage.Thus, we should not assume that the ship was fully booked.
Likeland travel, however, sea travel also was restricted by season. Inthe eastern half of the Mediterranean, the wind blows from thenorthwest toward the southeast persistently from June to September,marking the favorable sailing season. Vegetius (Mil. 4.39) writes,“From the 6th day before the kalends of June [May 27] until therising of Arcturus, that is until the 18th before the kalends ofOctober [Sept. 14], is believed to be the safe period ofnavigation.... From then up to the 3rd before theides of November, navigation is uncertain.... Fromthe 3rd before the ides of November to the 6th before the ides ofMarch, the seas are closed.” Many ancient writers indicatedthat sea travel in the winter was trecherous.
Aperson traveling by sea went first to the docks to inquire aboutships headed to the desired destination. Harbor managers, dockhands,sailors, or others pointed inquirers toward appropriate ships. Afternegotiating with a particular ship’s purser, whose job was tobook passengers (and guard against stowaways), a passenger was toldwhat day and time to be aboard. The lowest level of ships held theballast (usually sand or stone) and the bilgewater. Decking over itheld cargo. Some ships berthed the cheapest passengers in this area,what we now refer to as steerage (Lucian observes that suchpassengers were “not even able to stretch their legs on thebare boards alongside the bilgewater” [Jupp. trag. 48]). Largerfreighters had another deck above this that may have housed somepassengers. In general, however, travelers in Paul’s day (likeall travelers up until modern times) camped above deck (some withtents). Only the very wealthy rented cabins (P.Zen. 10). Shipwrecksand pirates were not the only dangers. A man cautioned his wife,“When you come, bring your gold ornaments, but do not wear themon the boat” (P.Mich. 3.214 [see also 8.468]). Then as now,tossing someone overboard left a clean crime scene (Jon. 1:15; cf.Acts 20:3).
Summary
Mostbiblical characters, like their peers, rarely traveled far from home.It is commonly estimated that Jesus’ ministry encompassed adistance no greater than one hundred miles from his home. Hisapostles, though, took advantage of the travel benefits of the RomanEmpire. Paul was a far more experienced traveler than most, both byland and sea (Acts 27:9–10, 30–32), although he appearsto have pushed the limits of safety on occasion. He mentions“sleepless nights and hunger” (2Cor. 6:5) as wellas being “in danger from rivers” and bandits (2Cor.11:26). In addition to what is reported in Acts 27, Paul wasshipwrecked at least three other times (2Cor. 11:25). Whetherby land or sea, travel in ancient times was not for the fainthearted.
It is difficult to imagine a world without consistentmetrological systems. Society’s basic structures, from economyto law, require a uniform and accurate method for measuring time,distances, weights, volumes, and so on. In today’s world,technological advancements allow people to measure various aspects ofthe universe with incredible accuracy—from nanometers tolight-years, milligrams to kilograms.
Themetrological systems employed in biblical times span the sameconcepts as our own modern-day systems: weight, linear distance, andvolume or capacity. However, the systems of weights and measurementsemployed during the span of biblical times were not nearly asaccurate or uniform as the modern units employed today. Preexistingweight and measurement systems existed in the contextual surroundingsof both the OT and the NT authors and thus heavily influenced thesystems employed by the Israelite nation as well as the NT writers.There was great variance between the different standards usedmerchant to merchant (Gen. 23:16), city to city, region to region,time period to time period, even despite the commands to use honestscales and honest weights (Lev. 19:35–36; Deut. 25:13–15;Prov. 11:1; 16:11; 20:23; Ezek. 45:10).
Furthermore,inconsistencies and contradictions exist within the written recordsas well as between archaeological specimens. In addition, significantdifferences are found between preexilic and postexilic measurementsin the biblical texts, and an attempt at merging dry capacity andliquid volume measurements further complicated the issue. This is tobe expected, especially when we consider modern-dayinconsistencies—for example, 1 US liquid pint= 0.473liters, while 1 US dry pint= 0.550 liters. Thus, all modernequivalents given below are approximations, and even the bestestimates have a margin of error of + 5percent or more.
Weights
Weightsin biblical times were carried in a bag or a satchel (Deut. 25:13;Prov. 16:11; Mic. 6:11) and were stones, usually carved into variousanimal shapes for easy identification. Their side or flat bottom wasinscribed with the associated weight and unit of measurement.Thousands of historical artifacts, which differ by significantamounts, have been discovered by archaeologists and thus have greatlycomplicated the work of determining accurate modern-day equivalents.
Beka.Approximately 1⁄5 ounce, or 5.6 grams. Equivalent to 10 gerahsor ½ the sanctuary shekel (Exod. 38:26). Used to measuremetals and goods such as gold (Gen. 24:22).
Gerah.1⁄50 ounce, or 0.56 grams. Equivalent to 1⁄10 beka, 1⁄20shekel (Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25).
Litra.Approximately 12 ounces, or 340 grams. A Roman measure of weight.Used only twice in the NT (John 12:3; 19:39). The precursor to themodern British pound.
Mina.Approximately 1¼ pounds, or 0.56 kilograms. Equivalent to 50shekels. Used to weigh gold (1Kings 10:17; Ezra 2:69), silver(Neh. 7:71–72), and other goods. The prophet Ezekiel redefinedthe proper weight: “Theshekel is to consist of twentygerahs. Twenty shekels plus twenty-five shekels plus fifteen shekelsequal one mina” (Ezek. 45:12). Before this redefinition, therewere arguably 50 shekels per mina. In Jesus’ parable of theservants, he describes the master entrusting to his three servantsvarying amounts—10 minas, 5 minas, 1 mina—implying amonetary value (Luke 19:11–24), probably of either silver orgold. One mina was equivalent to approximately three months’wages for a laborer.
Pim.Approximately 1⁄3 ounce, or 9.3 grams. Equivalent to 2⁄3shekel. Referenced only once in the Scriptures (1Sam. 13:21).
Shekel.Approximately 2⁄5 ounce, or 11 grams. Equivalent toapproximately 2 bekas. The shekel is the basic unit of weightmeasurement in Israelite history, though its actual weight variedsignificantly at different historical points. Examples include the“royal shekel” (2Sam. 14:26), the “commonshekel” (2Kings 7:1), and the “sanctuary shekel,”which was equivalent to 20 gerahs (e.g., Exod. 30:13; Lev. 27:25;Num. 3:47). Because it was used to weigh out silver or gold, theshekel also functioned as a common monetary unit in the NT world.
Talent.Approximately 75 pounds, or 34 kilograms. Equivalent to approximately60 minas. Various metals were weighed using talents: gold (Exod.25:39; 37:24; 1Chron. 20:2), silver (Exod. 38:27; 1Kings20:39; 2Kings 5:22), and bronze (Exod. 38:29). This probably isderived from the weight of a load that a man could carry.
Table12. Biblical Weights and Measures and Their Modern Equivalents:
Weights
Beka– 10 geraahs; ½ shekel = 1/5 ounce = 5.6 grams
Gerah– 1/10 beka; 1/20 shekel = 1/50 ounce = 0.56 grams
Litra– 12 ounces = 340 grams
Mina– 50 shekels = 1 ¼ pounds = 0.56 kilograms
Pim– 2/3 shekel = 1/3 ounce = 9.3 grams
Shekel– 2 bekas; 20 gerahs = 2/5 ounce = 11 grams
Talent– 60 minas = 75 pounds = 34 kilograms
Linearmeasurements
Cubit– 6 handbreadths = 18 inches = 45.7 centimeters
Day’sjourney = 20-25 miles = 32-40 kilometerse
Fingerbreadth– ¼ handbreadth = ¾ inch = 1.9 centimeterse
Handbreadth– 1/6 cubit = 3 inches = 7.6 centimeters
Milion– 1 mile = 1.6 kilometers
Orguia– 1/100 stadion = 5 feet 11 inches = 1.8 meters
Reed/rod– 108 inches = 274 centimeters
Sabbathday’s journey – 2,000 cubits = ¾ mile = 1.2kilometers
Span– 3 handbreadths = 9 inches = 22.8 centimeters
Stadion– 100 orguiai = 607 feet = 185 meters
Capacity
Cab– 1 omer = ½ gallon = 1.9 liters
Choinix– ¼ gallon = 0.9 liters
Cor– 1 homer; 10 ephahs = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Ephah– 10 omers; 1/10 homer = 3/5 bushel; 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Homer– 10 ephahs; 1 cor = 6 bushels; 48.4 gallons = 183 liters
Koros– 10 bushels; 95 gallons – 360 liters
Omer– 1/10 ephah; 1/100 homer = 2 quarts = 1.9 liters
Saton– 1 seah = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
Seah– 1/3 ephah; 1 saton = 7 quarts = 6.6 liters
LiquidVolume
Bath– 1 ephah = 6 gallons = 22.7 liters
Batos– 8 gallons = 30.3 liters
Hin– 1/6 bath; 12 logs = 1 gallon; 4 quarts = 3.8 liters
Log– 1/72 bath; 1/12 hin = 1/3 quart = 0.3 liters
Metretes– 10 gallons = 37.8 literes
LinearMeasurements
Linearmeasurements were based upon readily available natural measurementssuch as the distance between the elbow and the hand or between thethumb and the little finger. While convenient, this method ofmeasurement gave rise to significant inconsistencies.
Cubit.Approximately 18 inches, or 45.7 centimeters. Equivalent to 6handbreadths. The standard biblical measure of linear distance, asthe shekel is the standard measurement of weight. The distance fromthe elbow to the outstretched fingertip. Used to describe height,width, length (Exod. 25:10), distance (John 21:8), and depth (Gen.7:20). Use of the cubit is ancient. For simple and approximateconversion into modern units, divide the number of cubits in half formeters, then multiply the number of meters by 3 to arrive at feet.
1cubit = 2 spans = 6 handbreadths = 24 fingerbreadths
Day’sjourney.An approximate measure of distance equivalent to about 20–25miles, or 32–40 kilometers. Several passages reference a singleor multiple days’ journey as a description of the distancetraveled or the distance between two points: “a day’sjourney” (Num. 11:31; 1Kings 19:4), “a three-dayjourney” (Gen. 30:36; Exod. 3:18; 8:27; Jon. 3:3), “sevendays” (Gen. 31:23), and “eleven days” (Deut. 1:2).After visiting Jerusalem for Passover, Jesus’ parents journeyedfor a day (Luke 2:44) before realizing that he was not with them.
Fingerbreadth.The width of the finger, or ¼ of a handbreadth, approximately¾ inch, or 1.9 centimeters. The fingerbreadth was thebeginning building block of the biblical metrological system forlinear measurements. Used only once in the Scriptures, to describethe bronze pillars (Jer. 52:21).
Handbreadth.Approximately 3 inches, or 7.6 centimeters. Equivalent to 1/6 cubit,or four fingerbreadths. Probably the width at the base of the fourfingers. A short measure of length, thus compared to a human’sbrief life (Ps. 39:5). Also the width of the rim on the bread table(Exod. 25:25) and the thickness of the bronze Sea (1Kings7:26).
Milion.Translated “mile” in Matt. 5:41. Greek transliteration ofRoman measurement mille passuum, “a thousand paces.”
Orguia.Approximately 5 feet 11 inches, or 1.8 meters. Also translated as“fathom.” A Greek unit of measurement. Probably thedistance between outstretched fingertip to fingertip. Used to measurethe depth of water (Acts 27:28).
Reed/rod.Approximately 108 inches, or 274 centimeters. This is also a generalterm for a measuring device rather than a specific linear distance(Ezek. 40:3, 5; 42:16–19; Rev. 11:1; 21:15).
Sabbathday’s journey.Approximately ¾ mile, or 1.2 kilometers (Acts 1:12). About2,000 cubits.
Span.Approximately 9 inches, or 22.8 centimeters. Equivalent to threehandbreadths, and ½ cubit. The distance from outstretchedthumb tip to little-finger tip. The length and width of the priest’sbreastpiece (Exod. 28:16).
Stadion.Approximately 607 feet, or 185 meters. Equivalent to 100 orguiai.Used in the measurement of large distances (Matt. 14:24; Luke 24:13;John 6:19; 11:18; Rev. 14:20; 21:16).
LandArea
Seed.The size of a piece of land could also be measured on the basis ofhow much seed was required to plant that field (Lev. 27:16; 1Kings18:32).
Yoke.Fields and lands were measured using logical, available means. Inbiblical times, this meant the amount of land a pair of yoked animalscould plow in one day (1Sam. 14:14; Isa. 5:10).
Capacity
Cab.Approximately ½ gallon, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1 omer.Mentioned only once in the Scriptures, during the siege of Samaria(2Kings 6:25).
Choinix.Approximately ¼ gallon, or 0.9 liters. A Greek measurement,mentioned only once in Scripture (Rev. 6:6).
Cor.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equal to thehomer, and to 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularlyof flour and grains (1Kings 4:22; 1Kings 5:11; 2Chron.2:10; 27:5; Ezra 7:22). In the LXX, cor is also a measure of liquidvolume, particularly oil (1Kings 5:11; 2Chron. 2:10; Ezra45:14).
Ephah.Approximately 3⁄5 bushel (6 gallons, or 22.7 liters).Equivalent to 10 omers, or 1⁄10 homer. Used for measuring flourand grains (e.g., Exod. 29:40; Lev. 6:20). Isaiah prophesied a day ofreduced agricultural yield, when a homer of seed would produce onlyan ephah of grain (Isa. 5:10). The ephah was equal in size to thebath (Ezek. 45:11), which typically was used for liquid measurements.
Homer.Approximately 6 bushels (48.4 gallons, or 183 liters). Equivalent to1 cor, or 10 ephahs. Used for measuring dry volumes, particularly ofvarious grains (Lev. 27:16; Isa. 5:10; Ezek. 45:11, 13–14; Hos.3:2). This is probably a natural measure of the load that a donkeycan carry, in the range of 90 kilograms. There may have existed adirect link between capacity and monetary value, given Lev. 27:16:“fifty shekels of silver to a homer of barley seed.” Alogical deduction of capacity and cost based on known equivalencesmight look something like this:
1homer = 1 mina; 1 ephah = 5 shekels; 1 omer = 1 beka
Koros.Approximately 10 bushels (95 gallons, or 360 liters). A Greek measureof grain (Luke 16:7).
Omer.Approximately 2 quarts, or 1.9 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄10ephah, 1⁄100 homer (Ezek. 45:11). Used by Israel in themeasurement and collection of manna in the wilderness (Exod.16:16–36) and thus roughly equivalent to a person’s dailyfood ration.
Saton.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1 seah. Themeasurement of flour in Jesus’ parable of the kingdom of heaven(Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:21).
Seah.Approximately 7 quarts, or 6.6 liters. Equivalent to 1⁄3 ephah,or 1 saton. Used to measure flour, grain, seed, and other various drygoods (e.g., 2Kings 7:1; 1Sam. 25:18).
LiquidVolume
Bath.Approximately 6 gallons, or 22.7 liters. Equivalent to 1 ephah, whichtypically was used for measurements of dry capacity. Used in themeasurement of water (1Kings 7:26), oil (1Kings 5:11),and wine (2Chron. 2:10; Isa. 5:10).
Batos.Approximately 8 gallons, or 30.3 liters. A Greek transliteration ofthe Hebrew word bath(see above). A measure of oil (Luke 16:6).
Hin.Approximately 4 quarts (1gallon, or 3.8 liters). Equivalent to1⁄6 bath and 12 logs. Used in the measurement of water (Ezek.4:11), oil (Ezek. 46:5), and wine (Num. 28:14).
Log.Approximately 1⁄3 quart, or 0.3 liter. Equivalent to 1⁄72bath and 1⁄12 hin. Mentioned five times in Scripture,specifically used to measure oil (Lev. 14:10–24).
Metretes.Approximately 10 gallons, or 37.8 liters. Used in the measurement ofwater at the wedding feast (John 2:6).
Showing
1
to
50
of305
results
1. I Smell Bread
Illustration
George Bass
In one of the episodes of M*A*S*H, the sophisticated shell, inside which Major Winchester protects himself from the horror of the suffering and death with which he constantly deals, breaks; and he is left defenseless. He goes into a type of depression in which he struggles to find some answers to life's most perplexing problem -- death. Finally, in utter desperation, he leaves the base hospital and goes up to the battalion aid station where the wounded are first taken. Colonel Potter discovers where he is and calls him, ordering him to return to the M*A*S*H hospital. A medical corpsman interrupts the conversation and calls the surgeon over to a man who is dying. Winchester confirms the impending death with a glance. The soldier says, "I can't see anything. Hold my hand." The major replies, "I am." "I'm dying," the soldier moans, and this causes the surgeon's unarticulated questions to surface: "Can you see anything? Can you feel anything? I have to know." But the dying soldier doesn't answer. Instead, he says, "I smell bread."
You cannot miss the significance of the symbol. Bread is the symbol for Christ. It is a symbol for going home. It is at the table that we are brought face to face with the person and mission of Jesus Christ. In that meal, we celebrate our death and our life in Christ. But Christ doesn't allow us, any more than he allowed the disciples, to relax and enjoy the fellowship of his table, simply talking about the Lord and what the resurrection experience means to us as though that's all there is to the Easter appearances of the Lord.
If we dare to say, "Christ is risen! He is risen indeed!" We are enjoined to listen and respond to what else he has to say: "You are my witness (Luke 24:48)." Just as the disciples witnessed in the first century of the Christian era, it is our business to show the world by what we do and say that the Lord is really alive and that he is, indeed, the Lord of all. That's a significant part of the continuing story about the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Those who hear it and believe that it is true are charged with the responsibility of passing it on to the rest of the world so that all people will have the opportunity to hear and believe.
2. And Their Eyes Were Opened
Illustration
Larry Powell
Some years ago, a movie titled Zapata depicted the engaging story of the famous Mexican hero, Zapata. He was to the Mexicans what "El Cid" was to the Spanish: a redeemer of his people. Those who loved Zapata were radically devoted to him and his cause. At the end, when Zapata was ambushed by government troops, the white horse upon which he had led countless charges, escaped into the hills. The peasants violently refused to believe that their leader would have allowed himself to be ambushed and killed, and whenever they caught a glimpse of the white horse in the hills, they claimed that it carried Zapata, signaling to them that he would return. They fully expected the return, but in time, the expectation died.
Although Jesus attempted on several occasions to interpret specific events to his disciples, as well as to prepare them for his certain return, not one of them was prepared. As Carlyle Marney once said, none of them lay hidden in the shrubbery near the tomb ... waiting ... waiting. Judas had gone off somewhere and hanged himself. The others were scattered, afraid, stroking their wounds, trying to recover from the total collaspe of everything. They had not been prepared for the crucifixion, much less the Resurrection. The post-Resurrection appearances mentioned in our scripture caught them totally by surprise. Two observations about the particular appearance described in our text:
1. The two men were on their way to Emmaus, discussing events pertaining to the crucifixion. Jesus caught up to them in the midst of their own journey, becoming a part of it himself, and in the end, baptizing it with his blessing. Those of us in the church believe that this is still the way Christ often comes into our lives. Off on our own journeys, pursuing some goal or objective, totally submerged in our own concerns ... determined, ambitious, outrunning the spiritual life while in full stride toward that which we hope to achieve. And then, it happens. In half-step we are arrested by the sudden awareness of another presence; we had not expected it, nor do we always recognize it immediately. It just abides, and just as with the Emmaus travelers, it comes into clearer focus in due time. As the Holy Spirit accompanies us in our own journeys, it is hoped that somewhere along the way it may be with us as it was with them; "And their eyes were opened and they recognized him" (v. 31).
2. It is significant that Jesus was made known to them in the "breaking of bread." In the upper room Jesus had taken the elements of the Passover meal and transformed them into something completely different. The familiar ritual was changed from remarks about the Passover to references to the "body and blood" of the host. In a very real sense, Jesus’ messianic identity was uniquely made known to them in the breaking of bread in the upper room. Then, at Emmaus, he was again "made known" in the breaking of bread. There are other references to post-Resurrection appearances of Jesus at which his presence was made known around a meal (see Mark 16:14; John 21:9-14). Little wonder that early Christians quickly associated a mystical significance with the meal, more specifically, the Eucharist. Consequently, the church observed communion several times daily with the prayer, "Maranatha" (Come Lord!).
The expected return of Zapata was never fulfilled, and eventually the expectation faded. The unexpected return of Jesus of Nazareth took even his followers by surprise. Ironically, it seems that he must still catch us from behind.
3. Optical Illusions
Illustration
Mickey Anders
I love optical illusions. There are two pictures which are classic optical illusions where your mind plays tricks on you. In the first, some people see an old woman; some people see a young woman. In the second one, some people see a rabbit; some people see a duck. Physicists say that optical illusions prove that our brains add substantially to the visual input from our eyes. What we see is actually made up by our brains.
In our Scripture passage today, the two disciples on the road to Emmaus did not see Jesus even though they walked with him and talked with him on the road. That simple puzzle has amazed Biblical scholars for ages. We assume that Cleopas and the other disciple (who some say was Mrs. Cleopas) knew Jesus well enough that they should have recognized him. But verse 16 says, "...their eyes were kept from recognizing him."
How did that happen?
4. Do You Know the Way to Emmaus?
Illustration
David E. Leininger
Do you know the way to Emmaus? It should be relatively easy to find because the text locates the town "seven miles from Jerusalem." But no one has ever been able to identify an "Emmaus" seven miles from Jerusalem. Perhaps there is confusion because two different numbers appear in ancient manuscripts at the point at which Luke gives us the location. Some texts say "60 stadia," and others say "160," which works out roughly to be either 7 miles or 18 miles. Although there are indeed many references to Emmaus in ancient sources, none of them give us any specific directions. Because of this, the unlikely village of Amwas (20 miles from Jerusalem) is currently a popularly recognized site for pilgrimage, even though other towns have stronger claims to be the historical town.
Ironically, the seemingly superficial mystery regarding the actual location of Emmaus fits in nicely with the deepest meaning of this passage. Do you know the way to Emmaus? Emmaus may be here, or there, or anywhere. The site of the original episode is irrelevant. Christ will travel wherever his followers are going. Christ will appear wherever they break bread. Even here. Even now.
5. If You Have to Ask
Illustration
David E. Leininger
Asked by a persistent reporter to define the meaning of jazz, legendary trumpeter Louis Armstrong is reputed to have answered, "If you have to ask the question, you'll never know." Something similar is true of Jesus' revelation of himself in our lesson. We do not reach Jesus by dint of our own effort. We know him only because he chooses to reveal himself to us. He does so not dramatically and with power, but humbly and personally. The risen Jesus does not appear to the rich and famous, the movers and shakers of that time. He does not show up before the throne of the emperor in Rome, demanding to be vindicated. Rather, he falls in beside a couple of dispirited wanderers who are wending their way home after having their hopes dashed.
6. Someone Is Always Waiting
Illustration
Eric Ritz
There is a story about a young boy who had to travel cross country by train from Los Angeles to Philadelphia to see his grandparents once a year. He had completed his stay with his grandparents and was ready to return home to Philadelphia. He safely boarded the train and began the long trip home. While on the train, a business executive asked him if he was afraid to take the long trip by himself. The little boy boldly declared, "No, I am not, because I know my father will be there to meet me."
Our God is not some unconcerned deity, but a loving father who has promised to never leave us or forsake us. No matter where we travel in our faith journey, we will never go beyond the reach of our father's loving hand.
7. New Doors Will Open
Illustration
Wayne Cordeiro and Robert Lewis
David Livingstone, the famous nineteenth-century missionary and explorer, was eager to travel into the uncharted lands of Central Africa to preach the gospel. On one occasion he arrived at the edge of a large territory that was ruled by a tribal chieftain. He was instructed to stop at the perimeter and wait. According to tradition, the chief would come out to meet him there. Livingstone could go forward only after an exchange was made. The chief would choose any item of Livingstone's personal property that caught his fancy and keep it for himself, while giving the missionary something of his own in return.
Livingstone had few possessions with him, but he obediently spread them all out on the ground–his clothes, his books, his watch, and even the goat that provided him with milk, since chronic stomach problems kept him from drinking the local water. To his dismay, the chief took the goat. In return, the chief gave him a carved stick, shaped like a walking cane.
Livingstone was most disappointed. He began to gripe to God about what he viewed as a stupid walking cane. What could it do for him, compared to the goat who kept him well? Then one of the natives explained, "That's not a walking cane. It's the king's very own scepter, and with it you will find entrance to every village in our country. The king has honored you greatly."
The native was right. God opened Central Africa to Livingstone, and as successive evangelists followed him, wave after wave of conversions occurred.
We believe that when you, as a church leader, find the keys to your culture, it will be similar to receiving the king's scepter. With it, new doors will open to you. Dreams you've had for transforming, revitalizing or strengthening your church will now have ways of becoming reality.
8. Suddenly, Their Eyes Were Opened
Illustration
Scott Hoezee
In the ancient Greek myth The Odyssey we read the epic tale of Odysseus. Odysseus was the valiant warrior who fought so bravely in the Trojan War. But, according to legend, his homeward journey after that war was interrupted for many years as the gods had decided to test Odysseus' true mettle through a series of trials. His journeys carried him far and wide as he encountered mythic beasts and lands, many of which have passed into common parlance: the Cyclops, the Procrustean bed, Scylla and Charybdis, the sirens' voices.
Meanwhile, back at his home, Odysseus' wife and family presume he must have died en route back from Troy. Finally, however, the day came when the gods released Odysseus and he arrives back home at last. But instead of simply waltzing through the front door and crying out some Greek equivalent of, "Honey, I'm home!" Odysseus decides that he wants to determine if anything has changed during his long absence. Did his wife still love him? Had she been faithful? In order to find out, Odysseus disguises himself so as to approach his home looking like a stranger in need of temporary lodging.
The housekeeper, Euryclea, welcomes the apparent traveler and performs for him the then-standard practice of foot-washing. As she does so, Euryclea regales the stranger with anecdotes about her long-lost master, Odysseus, whom she had also served as a nurse when he was young. She told the traveler about how long her master has been missing and she noted, too, that by then Odysseus would be about the same age and of about the same build as the man whose feet she was washing. Now when Odysseus had been a young boy, he was once gored by a wild boar, leaving a nasty scar on his leg. As Euryclea went about her servile task, suddenly her hand brushed against that old scar and instantly her eyes were opened and she recognized, with great joy, her beloved friend and master!
The men on the road to Emmaus have traveled with Jesus for hours listening to his knowledge and stories, but in the breaking of bread, suddenly it occurs to them. This is Jesus. Their master has returned.
9. What Is Going to Happen Today?
Illustration
Billy D. Strayhorn
In Winnie the Pooh, Pooh and Piglet take an evening walk. For a long time they walk in silence. Silence like only best friends can share.
Finally Piglet breaks the silence and asks, "When you wake up in the morning, Pooh, what's the first thing you say to yourself?"
"What's for breakfast?" answers Pooh and then asks. "And what do you say, Piglet?"
Piglet says, "I say, I wonder what exciting thing is going to happen today?"
You and I can't really plan to meet the Risen Christ because we never really know when or where He's going to show up. But you can be sure of this, He will show up. If you believe, He will show up. And the attitude you need to meet him is the attitude of Piglet, "I wonder what exciting thing is going to happen today?"
10. A Familiar Face Out of Context
Illustration
Donovan Drake
The last time I couldn't recognize a familiar face was because that person was out of context! I was at a ball game and there came a man who was searching for his seat about three rows ahead of me. When the man saw me, he immediately flashed a smile, waved at me, and said, "Hey, Donovan." Well, he obviously knew who I was, but who was he? I didn't recognize him. He looked familiar. He wasn't in my church. Maybe he was a member of the Rotary Club. Who was he? It was driving me crazy. Later in the game I had an opportunity to catch up to him, and I said, "I apologize, I know you. I know I know you, but I don't know you. Who are you?" He said, "Donovan, I'm Dr. First, your dentist."
Of course! If he had come to the game wearing some scrubs and a mask with goggles, and if I had a numb lip, maybe I would have recognized him.
Is that the trouble Cleopas and his friend were having on the road to Emmaus? They remembered a crucified Jesus. They remembered a dead Jesus. He was dead. Period. A risen Jesus is out of context. Is that why those two did not recognize him? It sounds good, but I don't know. What I do know is that I want Jesus to let these two in on his identity. "Come on Jesus, tell them who you are!"
11. Lunch in the Park with God
Illustration
Jef Olson
There was once a little boy who decided he wanted to find God. He knew it would probably be a long trip, so he decided to pack a lunch—four packs of Twinkies and two cans of root beer.
He set out on his journey and went a few blocks until he came to a park. On one of the park benches sat an old woman looking at the pigeons.
The little boy sat down beside her and watched the pigeons too. When he grew hungry, he pulled out some Twinkies. As he ate, he noticed the woman watching him, so he offered her one. She accepted it gratefully and smiled at him. He thought she had the most beautiful smile in the world. Wanting to see it again, he opened a can of root beer and offered her the other one. Once again she smiled that beautiful smile.
For a long time the two sat on that park bench eating Twinkies, drinking root beer, smiling at each other, and watching the pigeons. Neither said a word. Finally, the little boy realized that it was getting late and he needed to go home. He started to leave, took a few steps, turned back and gave the woman a big hug. Her smile was brighter than ever before.
When he arrived home, his mother noticed that he was happy, but strangely quiet. ‘What did you do today?' she asked. ‘Oh, I had lunch in the park with God,' he said. Before his mother could reply, he added, ‘You know, she has the most beautiful smile in the world.'
Meanwhile, the old woman left the park and returned to her home.
Her son noticed something different about her. ‘What did you do today, Mom?' he asked. ‘Oh, I ate Twinkies and drank root beer in the park with God." And before her son could say anything at all, she added, ‘You know, God's a lot younger than I imagined.'"
12. Feeling It in Your Heart
Illustration
Kenneth J. Hockenberry
In the greatest movie of all time, "It's a Wonderful Life" – you remember at the end of the movie, Burt the cop brings Harry home, through the snow storm. And the Bailey living room is filled with friends, there to help George in his time of need. And Harry offers a toast – "to my big brother George, the richest man in town."
Right there – that's what I'm talking about. In those words, in that moment, we know the truth of that word in our guts. George is the richest man in town – not in money – but because of his many friends, whose lives he has touched, and who have touched his.
What we feel from that movie we also know in our lives. When we hear something that is true and right, we feel it deep down - there is a kind of bodily resonance that occurs. We even respond with the words, "that really moved me."
Luke refers to this as heart burn:
"Were not our hearts burning within us while he was talking to us on the road, while he was opening the scriptures to us?"
13. Filled with Fear, Accepted with Grace
Illustration
J. Daniel Hester
Ernie Pyle, a well known WWII news Correspondent, was known for writing about the average GI. He didn't write about the strategy and the campaigns. He wrote about the guy slogging through the mud and dodging bullets to get back home. He knew the GI's because he lived with them, and eventually died with them.
In one of his books, he tells the story of a German soldier who had been taken prisoner. This German soldier had been told horrible stories about what the Americans would do to POW's, and so he was scared. The German was wounded and was taken to the medical station. The medics tried to give him a shot of morphine so they could tend to his wounds; but, the German objected furiously, afraid that he was going to be tortured. After some time, after observing the attention given to the other wounded, and the other POW's, this soldier finally started to figure out that he was being treated like everyone else and his amazement grew. Finally, the chaplain, making his morning rounds, gave the German soldier cigarettes, candy, tooth powder, and soap just like everyone else. The German soldier started to grin and sat up playing with his new possessions like a little boy with new toys.
That's what Easter looks like. We are in the hands of a power that we think should destroy us. Instead, God meets us with resurrection.
14. God Is Watching You
Illustration
Adin Steinsaltz
“My great-grandfather, who was a Hassidic Rabbi, was once driving along a country road. The coachman saw an apple orchard, jumped out, and began to take some apples. The Rabbi cried out, ‘You are being watched! You are being watched!’ The coachman did not linger a second----he jumped back in the carriage and drove the horses as fast as he could. After a while, when they were a considerable distance away, he stopped and said, ‘But I did not see anybody watching!’ The Rabbi replied, ‘God is watching you.’”
15. Superman
Illustration
M. Switzer
In Superman: The Movie, Superman first reveals his powers to the world with a dramatic rescue of Lois Lane. Lois is dangling from a cable high above the Daily Planet building. She is screaming at the top of her lungs. Just as she begins her long fall toward earth, Superman changes into his power suit and swoops up to catch her in midair. "Don't worry, Miss," he says. I've got you."
"Thanks," says Lois. "But who's got you?"
Just then a helicopter that has been parked on the edge of the building starts to fall straight toward them and the crowd below. But Superman simply grabs it with his one free arm and gently sets both it and Lois safely back on the landing pad. When he turns to leave, Lois stammers out the words, "Who are you?"
Superman says, "A friend" and flies off just before Lois faints into a heap.
That's how we would like Christ to come to us. And that's why we often aren't paying attention when he comes in less spectacular ways.
16. Between Belief and Disbelief
Illustration
Randolph T. Riggs
It should not come as a surprise to us that the disciples struggled to believe in the Resurrection. We understand them, don't we? We want to believe, but we live somewhere in between belief and non-belief. In fact, we may feel more like the family of actress Helen Hayes. Her husband and her son wanted to encourage her desire to try her hand at cooking her first Thanksgiving Dinner. So in the days leading up to Thanksgiving Day, they gave her words of encouragement telling her that they were looking forward to the big event.
She had never cooked a turkey before, and before serving it, she announced to her husband and her son that if the turkey wasn't any good she didn't want anyone to say a word. She said, "We will just get up from the table, without comment, and go to a restaurant to eat."
Mrs. Hayes returned to the kitchen, and when she entered the dining room bearing the turkey on a platter, she found her husband and her son seated at the table with their hats and coats already on.
17. Humor: What's His Number
Illustration
Jonathan Pryke
One Sunday a vicar was doing a children's talk, using a telephone to illustrate the idea of prayer. "You talk to people on the telephone but you don't see them on the other end of the line, do you?" he began. The children shook their heads. "Well, talking to God is like talking on the telephone. He's on the other end, but you can't see him. He's listening though."
Just then a little boy piped up and asked, "What's his number?"
We don't need a telephone number to get through to God. We just need to know Jesus. He walks beside us by his Spirit. We can talk to him at any time. He wants us to keep talking. He always listens. He always understands.
18. The Road to Emmaus - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
A friend shared with me a beautiful legend about a king who decided to set aside a special day to honor his greatest subject. When the big day arrived, there was a large gathering in the palace courtyard. Four finalists were brought forward, and from these four, the king would select the winner.
The first person presented was a wealthy philanthropist. The king was told that this man was highly deserving of the honor because of his humanitarian efforts. He had given much of his wealth to the poor.
The second person was a celebrated physician. The king was told that this doctor was highly deserving of the honor because he had rendered faithful and dedicated service to the sick for many years.
The third person was a distinguished judge. The king was told that the judge was worthy because he was noted for his wisdom, his fairness, and his brilliant decisions.
The fourth person presented was an elderly woman. Everyone was quite surprised to see her there, because her manner was quite humble, as was her dress. She hardly looked the part of someone who would be honored as the greatest subject in the kingdom. What chance could she possibly have, when compared to the other three, who had accomplished so much? Even so, there was something about her the look of love in her face, the understanding in her eyes, her quiet confidence.
The king was intrigued, to say the least, and somewhat puzzled by her presence. He asked who she was. The answer came: "You see the philanthropist, the doctor, and the judge? Well, she was their teacher!"
That woman had no wealth, no fortune, and no title, but she had unselfishly given her life to produce great people. There is nothing more powerful or more Christlike than sacrificial love
The king could not see the value in the humble lady. He missed the significance of the teacher. Often we miss the value of those around us. I think it would surprise us to know how often we miss the presence of Christ just as Cleopas and his brother missed the significance of the stranger on the road to Emmaus.
19. The Resurrection Changes Everything
Illustration
Brett Blair
There's a story about a young boy named Walter Elias. Born in the city, his parents one day moved out to the country to become farmers. Walter had a vivid imagination and the farm was the perfect place for a young boy and a wondering mind. One day in the apple orchard he was amazed when he saw sitting on a branch of one of the apple trees an owl. He just stood there and stared at the owl. He thought about what his father had told him about owls: owls always rested during the day because they hunted throughout the night. This owl was asleep. He also thought that this owl might make a great pet.
Being careful not to make any noises he stepped over sticks and leaves. The owl was in a deep sleep because it never heard Walter Elias walking toward it. Finally, standing under the owl, he reached up and grabbed the owl by the legs. Now, the events that followed are difficult to explain. Suddenly everything was utter chaos. The owl came to life. Walter's thoughts about keeping the bird as a pet were quickly forgotten. The air filled with wings, and feathers, and screaming. In the excitement Walter held the legs tighter. And in his panic, Walter Elias, still holding on to the owl, threw it to the ground and stomped it to death. After things calmed down, Walter looked at the now dead and bloody bird and began to cry. He ran back to the farm, obtained a shovel, and buried the owl in the orchard.
At night he would dream of that owl. As the years passed he never got over what had happened that summer day. Deep down it affected him for the rest of his life. As an older man he said he never, ever killed anything again. Do you see it? Something significant happened after that event. Something that Walter didn't miss. Something which transformed Walter Elias, something that redeemed him from the pit of despair, something that resurrected him, something that made Walter Elias Disney give life to thousands of animals on the big screen.
The resurrection changes everything. It transforms us. It moves us from despair to new possibilities of life. It takes us in our blindness and opens our eyes. It transforms ordinary bread into a holy meal. It takes two sad and lost brothers on the road to Emmaus who had lost the only the world they knew and gives it back to them. Jesus comes to them and says see I am not dead. I am alive. Now tell the world.
20. Not Always A Saint
Illustration
Brett Blair
One of the greatest voices of the church was St. Augustine. He lived between the 4th and 5th centuries in Rome and was a Bishop. After Rome fell and faded into dust it was largely Augustine's writings that kept Christianity alive and made it the most influential movement the world had ever known. It is remarkable that between the 8th and 12th centuries his writings were more widely read than any other. And that was 400 to 700 years after his death.
But he was not always a saint. Before he was converted at age 29 he lived to fulfill every lust and pleasure. But Augustine had one great quality that saved his pitiful life—a praying mother. She never gave up on him until one day he stopped long enough to listen to the voices around him. Augustine had just heard a sermon by Saint Ambrose, Bishop of Milan.
We are told in public speaking and preaching classes not to read long quotes but I'm going to do it anyway and read something that Augustine wrote. These two paragraphs shaped the hearts and minds of hundreds of thousands of people throughout history. He is looking back on his conversion to Christianity and the convictions of his heart. Here's the quote:
"One day, under deep conviction: I cast myself down I know not how, under a certain fig-tree, giving full vent to my tears; and the floods of mine eyes gushed out…So was I weeping in the most bitter contrition of my heart, when, lo! I heard from a neighboring house a voice, as of boy or girl, I know not, chanting and oft repeating, "Take up and read; Take up and read." Instantly, my countenance altered, I began to think most intently whether children were wont in any kind of play to sing such words; nor could I remember ever to have heard the like.
So checking the torrent of my tears, I arose; interpreting it to be no other than a command from God to open the book, and read the first chapter I should find... Eagerly then I returned to the place where Alypius (his friend) was sitting; for there had I laid the volume of the Apostle. I seized, opened, and in silence read that section on which my eyes first fell: ‘Not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying; but put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh...' No further would I read; nor needed I for instantly at the end of this sentence, by a light as it were of serenity infused into my heart, all the darkness of doubt vanished away."
21. Christ Never Gives Up
Illustration
King Duncan
There is a story of a British soldier in the First World War who lost heart for the battle and deserted. Trying to reach the coast for a boat to England that night, he ended up wandering in the pitch black night, hopelessly lost. In the darkness, he came across what he thought was a signpost. It was so dark that he began to climb the post so that he could read it. As he reached the top of the pole, he struck a match to see and found himself looking squarely into the face of Jesus Christ. He realized that, rather than running into a signpost, he had climbed a roadside crucifix. Then he remembered the One who had died for him . . . who had endured . . . who had never turned back. The next morning the soldier was back in the trenches.
Maybe that's what you and I need to do in the moments of our distress and darkness - strike a match in the darkness and look on the face of Jesus Christ. For Christ is here. He comes to us just as he came to those two disciples on the road to Emmaus even though we may not recognize him. He takes the initiative. He knocks on the door.
22. Thomas - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
If I were to mention the names of certain disciples to you and ask you to write down the first word that comes into your mind, it is unlikely you would come up with the same words. If I were to mention the name of Judas many of you would write down the word "betray" but not all of you. If I were to mention Simon Peter, some of you would write down the word "faith," but not all of you. If I were to mention the names of James and John, some of you would write down the phrase "Sons of Thunder," but not all of you. But when I mention the word Thomas, there is little question about the word most everyone would write down. It would be the word doubt. Indeed, so closely have we associated Thomas with this word, that we have coined a phrase to describe him: "Doubting Thomas."
You may be interested to know that in the first three gospels we are told absolutely nothing at all about Thomas. It is in John's Gospel that he emerges as a distinct personality, but even then there are only 155 words about him. There is not a lot about this disciple in the Bible but there is more than one description.
When Jesus turned his face toward Jerusalem the disciples thought that it would be certain death for all of them. Surprisingly, it was Thomas who said: Then let us go so that we may die with him. It was a courageous statement, yet we don't remember him for that. We also fail to point out that in this story of Thomas' doubt we have the one place in the all the Gospels where the Divinity of Christ is bluntly and unequivocally stated. It is interesting, is it not, that the story that gives Thomas his infamous nickname, is the same story that has Thomas making an earth shattering confession of faith? Look at his confession, "My Lord, and my God." Not teacher. Not Lord. Not Messiah. But God! It is the only place where Jesus is called God without qualification of any kind. It is uttered with conviction as if Thomas was simply recognizing a fact, just as 2 + 2 = 4, and the sun is in the sky. You are my Lord and my God! These are certainly not the words of a doubter.
Unfortunately history has remembered him for this scene where the resurrected Christ made an appearance to the disciples in a home in Jerusalem. Thomas was not present and when he heard about the event he refused to believe it. Maybe he was the forerunner of modern day cynicism. Maybe the news simply sounded too good to be true. Thomas said: Unless I feel the nail prints in his hands I will not believe.
Now I cannot help but notice that Thomas has separated himself from the disciples and therefore, in his solitude, missed the resurrection appearance. I think that john is suggesting to us that Christ appears most often within the community of believers that we call the church, and when we separate ourselves from the church we take a chance on missing his unique presence.
But the story doesn't end here. The second time Jesus made his appearance Thomas was present with the disciples and this time he too witnessed the event. This time he believed. What can we learn from the life of Thomas?
1. Jesus did not blame him.
2. The most endearing things in life can never be proven.
3. We must move beyond doubt to faith.
23. What Do You Believe about Jesus?
Illustration
David E. Leininger
What exactly do you believe about Jesus? Some years ago, in my seminary days, our first course in Systematic Theology dealt with that question. Our professor described Jesus as "the proleptic, salvific, hidden appearance of the eschatological kingdom of God." Did you get that? Take notes; there might be a test at the end of this. "The proleptic, salvific, hidden appearance of the eschatological kingdom of God." On our way out of class that morning, with the words of our gospel in mind, we chuckled at the whole thing: "Jesus said to them, 'Who do YOU say that I am?' Simon Peter replied, 'You are the proleptic, salvific, hidden appearance of the eschatological kingdom of God.' And Jesus answered him and said, 'WHAT???'"
Malcolm Muggeridge, for most of his life a skeptic, following his conversion became wonderfully reflective. In his book, Jesus Rediscovered, writes: "Beneath the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, a silver star marks the alleged precise spot where Christ was born. A stone slab nearby is supposed to mark the exact site of the manger wherein he lay. The Holy Land is littered with such shrines, divided up like African territories in the old colonialist days, between the different sects and denominations the Greeks, the Armenians, the Copts, the Latins, etc.—and often a cause of rancor among them. Most of the shrines are doubtless fraudulent, some in dubious taste, and none to my liking. Yet one may note, as the visitors come and go, ranging from the devout to the inanely curious, that almost every face somehow lights up a little."
There is something about Jesus. And the question to the disciples comes again: "Who do YOU say that I am?" You must answer. And you. And you. And you and you. I would not expect your response to say anything about "proleptic" or "salvific" or "eschatological." No, my prayer is that, with Simon Peter, you would simply say with every fibre of your being, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."
24. 101 Ways to Spend Your Time
Illustration
Tim Kimmel
Becoming good at the things that build inner confidence and calm takes practice and a dash of creativity! The following list might provide some cloudseeding for a brainstorm or two of your own:
- Pay off your credit cards.
- Take off ten pounds or accept where you are without any more complaints.
- Eat dinner together as a family for seven days in a row.
- Take your wife on a dialogue date (no movie, guys).
- Read your kids a classic book (Twain's a good start).
- Memorize the Twenty-third Psalm as a family.
- Give each family member a hug for twenty-one days in a row (that's how long the experts say it takes to develop a habit).
- Pick a night of the week in which the television will remain unplugged.
- Go out for a non-fast food dinner as a family.
- Pray for your spouse and children every day.
- Plan a vacation together.
- Take a vacation together.
- Read a chapter from the Bible every day until it becomes a habit.
- Sit together as a family in church.
- Surprise your teenager. Wash his car and fill up his gas tank.
- Take an afternoon off from work; surprise your child by excusing him from school and taking him to a ball game.
- Take a few hours one afternoon and go to the library as a family.
- Take a walk as a family.
- Write each member of your family a letter sharing why you value them.
- Give your spouse a weekend getaway with a friend (same gender!) to a place of their choice.
- Go camping as a family.
- Go to bed early (one hour before your normal bedtime) every day for a week.
- Take each of your children out to breakfast (individually) at least once a month for a year.
- Turn down a promotion that would demand more time from your family than you can afford to give.
- Religiously wear your seat belts.
- Get a complete physical.
- Exercise a little every day for a month.
- Make sure you have adequate life insurance on both you and your spouse.
- Write out information about finances, wills, and important business information that your spouse can use to keep things under control in the event of your death.
- Make sure your family car is safe (tires, brakes, etc.) and get it tuned up.
- Replace the batteries in your smoke alarm.
- Put a security system in your house.
- Attend the parent/teacher meetings of each child as a couple.
- Help your kids with their homework.
- Watch the kids on Saturday while your wife goes shopping (but if a friend calls, don't say that you're "babysitting").
- Explain to your spouse exactly what you do for a living.
- Put together a picture puzzle. (One thousand pieces or more.)
- Take time during the week to read a Bible story to your children and then discuss it with them.
- Encourage each child to submit to you his most perplexing question, and promise him that you'll either answer it or discuss it with him.
- Finish fixing something around the house.
- Tell your kids how you and your spouse met.
- Tell your kids about your first date.
- Sit down and write your parents a letter thanking them for a specific thing they did for you. (Don't forget to send it!)
- Go on a shopping spree where you are absolutely committed to buying nothing.
- Keep a prayer journal for a month. Keep track of the specific ways that God answers your needs.
- Do some stargazing away from the city with your family. Help your children identify constellations and conclude the evening with prayer to the majestic God who created the heavens.
- Treat your wife to a beauty make-over (facial, manicure, haircut, etc.). I hear they really like this.
- Give the kids an alternative to watching Saturday morning cartoons (breakfast at McDonald's, garage sales, the park, chores, etc.).
- Ask your children each day what they did at school (what they learned, who they ate lunch with, etc.).
- After you make your next major family decision, take your child back through the process and teach him how you arrived at your decision.
- Start saying to yourself "My car doesn't look so bad."
- Call you wife or husband from work just to see how they're doing.
- Compile a family tree and teach your children the history of their ancestors.
- Walk through an old graveyard with your children.
- Say no to at least one thing a day even if it's only a second piece of pie.
- Write that letter to the network that broadcast the show you felt was inappropriate for prime-time viewing.
- Turn off the lights and listen to a "praise" tape as you focus your thoughts on the Lord.
- Write a note to your pastor praising him for something.
- Take back all the books in your library that actually belong in someone else's library.
- Give irritating drivers the right to pull in front of you without signaling and yelling at them.
- Make every effort to not let the sun go down on your anger.
- Accept legitimate criticism from your wife or a friend without reacting or defending yourself.
- If your car has a Christian bumper sticker on in drive like it.
- Do a Bible study on the "wise man" and the "fool" in Proverbs...and then apply what it takes to be wise to your life.
- Make a list of people who have hurt your feelings over the past year...then check your list to see if you've forgiven them.
- Make a decision to honor your parents, even if they made a career out of dishonoring you.
- Take your children to the dentist and doctor for your wife.
- Play charades with your family, but limit subjects to memories of the past.
- Do the dishes for your wife.
- Schedule yourself a free day to stay home with your family.
- Get involved in a family project that serves or helps someone less fortunate.
- As a family, get involved in a recreational activity.
- Send your wife flowers.
- Spend an evening going through old pictures from family vacations.
- Take a weekend once a year for you and your spouse to get away and renew your friendship.
- Praise your spouse and children in their presence to someone else.
- Discuss a world or national problem, and ask your children for their opinion on it.
- Wait up for your teenagers when they are out on dates.
- Have a "quiet Saturday" (no television, no radio, no stereo...no kidding).
- If your children are little, spend an hour playing with them but let them determine the game.
- Have your parents tell your children about life when they were young.
- Give up soap operas.
- De-clutter your house.
- If you have a habit of watching late night television, but have to be to work early every morning, change your habit.
- Don't accept unnecessary breakfast appointments.
- Write missionaries regularly.
- Go through your closets and give everything that you haven't worn in a year to a clothing relief organization.
- Become a faithful and frequent visitor of your church's library.
- Become a monthly supporter of a Third World child.
- Keep mementos, school projects, awards, etc. of each child in separate files. You'll appreciate these when they've left the nest.
- Read the biography of a missionary.
- Give regularly and faithfully to conscientious church endeavors.
- Place with your will a letter to each family member telling why you were glad you got to share life with him or her.
- Go through your old records and tapes and discard any of them that might be a bad testimony to your children.
- Furnish a room (or a corner of a room) with comfortable chairs and declare it the "disagreement corner." When conflicts arise, go to this corner and don't leave until it's resolved.
- Give each child the freedom to pick his favorite dinner menu at least once a week.
- Go over to a shut-in's house as a family and completely clean it and get the lawn work done.
- Call an old friend from your past, just to see how he or she is getting along.
- Get a good friend to hold you accountable for a specific important need (Bible reading, prayer, spending time with your family, losing a few pounds, etc.).
- Establish a budget.
- Go to a Christian marriage enrichment seminar.
25. Portraying Jesus
Illustration
Phillip Yancey
A class was shown several dozen art slides portraying Jesus in a variety of forms--African, Korean, Chinese--and then asked to describe what they thought Jesus looked like. Virtually everyone suggested he was tall (unlikely for a first-century Jew), most said handsome, and no one said overweight. They were then shown a BBC film on the life of Christ that featured a pudgy actor in the title role, and some in the class found it offensive. We prefer a tall, handsome, and, above all, slender Jesus.
One tradition dating back to the second century suggested Jesus was a hunchback. In the Middle Ages, Christians widely believed that Jesus had suffered from leprosy. Most Christians today would find such notions repulsive and perhaps heretical. Was he not a perfect specimen of humanity? Yet in all the Bible there is only one physical description of sorts, a prophecy written hundreds of years before Christ’s birth. Here is Isaiah’s portrayal, in the midst of a passage that the New Testament applies to the life of Jesus:
Just as there were many who were appalled at him--his appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any man and his form marred beyond human likeness . . . “He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him. He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not.”
Because of the Gospels’ silence, we cannot answer with certainty the basic question of what Jesus looked like.
26. Salt and Light
Illustration
Larry Powell
Webster's dictionaryrefers to "witness" in such terms as "testimony ... to act as a witness of ... to give or be evidence of." It is understandable that Jesus would use such metaphors as salt and light when speaking of the Christian witness.
Salt. Salt was a valuable commodity in the ancient world, not uncommonly used as a bartering agent. As insignificant as the reference itself may seem, Jesus was actually dignifying the Church by referring to it in the sense of something rare and precious.
You are familiar with the expression, "That should be taken with a grain of salt." Sometimes things are said to us which are bland, tasteless, or even worse, in bad taste. Salt adds flavor which causes many items which we consume to become more palatable. The remark, "taken with a grain of salt" implies that some tasteless or crude remarks would go down better with a grain of salt. Salt adds flavor or zest. When Jesus commented, "You are the salt of the earth," he was implying that the Christian witness causes even the unfortunate, tasteless things in life to be more palatable. To remove the salt is to remove a prime ingredient to the whole of life itself, leaving it to the crude, base, and tasteless elements to prevail.
Matthew 5:13 continues, "But if salt has lost its taste, how shall its saltness be restored? It is no longer good for anything except to be thrown out and trodden under foot by men." Moffett translates the phrase more precisely: "If salt becomes insipid, what can make it salt again?" Insipid is the word. An insipid person is one who stands for nothing, contributes nothing, is dull, unimaginative, shallow, harmless, and a fence-straddler. Jesus encouraged the Church to be salt, avoiding insipidness.
Light. "You are the light of the world" is another familiar reference made in regard to the Christian witness. Indeed, a person does not light a lamp only to put it beneath a bushel where it cannot be seen. It is told that a congregation constructed a new sanctuary in which to worship. It was beautifully constructed, traditionally consistent with symbolic Christian architecture, practical in every consideration and lovely in every detail. Only one thing was omitted. There were no lights. Instead, little niches had been fashioned into the walls and window bases which were to hold candles. Each member was assigned a niche and told that he was to provide the candle for that particular spot. Otherwise, the spot would remain dark. In a very real sense, they were the light, and they got the message. They also understood that they were not only the light of the Church, but the "light of the world."
You and I are challenged to be the salt of the earth and the light of the world. The antithesis of the Christian witness is insipidness and darkness.
27. Death and Resurrection
Illustration
We, as human beings, whoever we are and whatever station in life we are in, all stand on common ground when we realize that we all at sometime in life fear death, we all live in the presence of death, that all men, in some way or another, have been hurt by death. And it does not only touch the life of the elderly. In his preface of "Bread For the World", Author Simon reminds us that before we complete reading this brief preface that four people in the world will have died of starvation, most of them children. So no matter who you are, whether you are in the sunset years and expect to live fewer years than you have lived to date, or whether you are just beginning life's journey—death is real. All of the wars in the world have not increased the death toll by one. It robs people of valuable years of their life but it in no way increases the death toll, for all of us, one day, shall have to go through the experience of death.
I have always wondered about the cynics and non-believers. What do they do at Easter? Have you ever wondered about that. On that day when the Christian church joyfully celebrates the resurrection of Jesus Christ, what do they do. Humanism is all right for the classroom, but it leaves you nothing at an icy graveside. It is precisely at that point that Christianity responds: Yes, we shall see our loved ones again and all be reunited.
Some demand that they need proof and documentation. I wonder what kind proof that they desire. There is more documented evidence that Jesus Christ rose from the dead than there is that Julius Caesar ever lived. There is more evidence of the resurrection than there is that Alexander the Great died at age 33. I have always found it interesting that some will accept thousands of facts for which there are only shreds of evidence, but in the face of overwhelming evidence of the resurrection they cast a skeptical doubt, because it is so unique. We say that we want the facts. Well the facts are that in the history of the ancient world the resurrection has been attested to as much as most of the events that we routinely accept and read in the history books.
In the early nineties the ABC news show 20/20 had an interesting segment on the shroud of Turin. If you were completely out of touch at that time and have not heard of the shroud of Turin, let me tell you that it is supposed to be the cloth that Jesus was buried in. And on this cloth is an imprint of the person of Jesus. It is now housed in a cathedral in Turin, Italy. Several years ago an international team of scientists, consisting of Christians, Jews, Moslems, and non-believers, set about to prove or disprove the story behind this ancient cloth. The results of their findings were published in an issue of National Geographic magazine.
The interesting thing to me about the 20/20 story was an interview that they had with one of the scientists, an Air Force colonel who was a specialist in laser technology. He openly admitted that he began the project not only as a non-Christian, but as a person who was openly anti-religious. I relished this opportunity, he said, to debunk what I considered a childish myth. Haraldo Rivera asked him: Now that you have spent four years on this project what is your response. His response not only shocking, but it was shocking that 20/20 allowed it to go on the air. He said: After four years on this project, I now fall upon my knees and worship a resurrected Christ.
It would be nice if we could hold some physical evidence in our hands to prove it all, but I would mislead you this Easter Day if I left the impression that the resurrection was a matter of fact. For in the end, the resurrection is a religious belief. In the end you cannot prove it or disprove it. And that is why some brilliant people believe and why some brilliant people do not believe. Because you cannot prove it one way or the other. There just are not any photographs. In the end we must fall back upon the words of the resurrected Christ to the disciple Thomas: Thomas, you have believed because you have seen. Blessed are those who have not seen, and yet believe.
28. The Easter Formula
Illustration
Billy D. Strayhorn
In April 2002, the well-respected Oxford University philosophy professor Richard Swineburne defended the truth of the Resurrection at a high-profile gathering of philosophy professors at Yale University. Swineburne used Bayes Theorem, a broadly accepted mathematical probability theory and tool to defend the truth of Christ's resurrection.
In a New York Times interview, Swineburne said, "For someone dead for 36 hours to come to life again is, according to the laws of nature, extremely improbable. But if there is a God of the traditional kind, natural laws only operate because he makes them operate." Swineburne used the Bayes Theorem to assign values to things like the probability that God is real, Jesus' behavior during his lifetime, and the quality of witness testimony after his death. Then he plugged the numbers into a probability formula and added everything up.
The results? There's a 97 percent probability that the resurrection really happened.
That's nice to know. It's one more tool in the tool kit of ministry. But the truth is that you and I don't really need that. The church doesn't really need that information. Because we have our own formula.
It's the Easter Formula: R+ET+F=LE. The Resurrection plus the Empty Tomb plus Faith equal Life Eternal. That's the Easter Formula.
29. I AM THE CHURCH
Illustration
John H. Krahn
I am the Church. Most of you associate me with steeples and stained glass windows. And in one sense, you are right. One of the ways I can be described is by my individual architectural style. I am usually constructed with the finest materials, and my cost per square foot is often quite high. I think this is appropriate because I make a visible statement to the world about the feelings of my members towards the Lord. I am a visible witness to the community. When I am allowed to look run-down, my appearance reflects how you feel about me.
Although many folks see me mainly as a building, this is only a small part of my personality. For the most part, I am people, people like you who are reading this message. I am the people of God who believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and are baptized. Each believer is part of me ... a little me, a little church. In the same way that the building part of me gives an image to the community, the people part of who I am makes a statement to the community also. We reflect God’s importance and love to the community we serve.
Because of the inability to understand clearly what God teaches in the Bible about what we should believe and how we should be in ministry, there are many denominations that make me up. This hurts me. It hurts me because God wants us all to be one. It hurts me because the non-believing world looks at our division and finds fault with us. This makes it harder for them to become one of us. It hurts me because we are also weakened through division. I am the Church, and for my sake, I hope each of you will pray that there will be greater understanding, acceptance, working together, and unity among all Christians.
There is another most important thing that I want to talk about. My cornerstone must always be the Lord Jesus Christ. Jesus said to the apostle Peter that his confession of faith in him was the strong foundation upon which the church must be built. When it is built on Jesus, not even the gates of hell can destroy it. Don’t forget your cornerstone. This is another way of my telling you not to forget your central purpose for being the church. I am the Church and my central, most important function is to share with my members and the world that God is in love with all people and desires their salvation. This can only happen when people recognize their sinfulness, repent, and receive Jesus Christ as the cornerstone of their personal lives. When this happens, God looks at them and no longer sees their sin but rather sees his Son, their Savior.
I challenge each of you to seek the help of God to expand in your love for him and for one another. I challenge you to expand in your willingness to listen to one another, to accept one another, to forgive one another. I challenge you to expand your involvement with other churches and the world-wide ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ. Finally, I challenge you to expand your efforts in sharing with each other and with your community the message of God’s love through Jesus Christ. This message is the Rock upon which I am built.
30. The Cape of Good Hope
Illustration
Pastor Buchs
I can still recall a geography lesson from elementary school in which we learned that thesouthernmostpointofAfricais apointwhich for centuries has experienced tremendous storms. For many years no one even knew what lay beyond that cape, for no ship attempting to round thatpointhad ever returned to tell the tale. Among the ancients it was known as the "CapeofStorms," and for good reason. But then a Portuguese explorer in the sixteenth century, Vasco De Gama, successfully sailed around that verypointand found beyond the wild raging storms, a great calm sea, and beyond that, the shoresofIndia. The nameofthat cape was changed from the CapeofStorms to the CapeofGood Hope.
Until Jesus Christ rose from the dead, death had been the cape of storms on which all hopes of life beyond had been wrecked. No one knew what lay beyond that point until, on Easter morning Christ showed us. His disciples trembled in fear, even after seeing evidence of His resurrection. Eventually, Christ turns their Cape of Storms into a Cape of Good Hope with His appearance and the peace He brings.
31. The Reality of the Resurrection - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
100 years ago few people thought it possible that man could fly. No one except the two sons of Rev. Milton Wright who at 10:35 on the morning of Dec. 17 1903 made their first successful flight of 175 feet in a airplane driven by a four cylinder combustion engine. Today we fly much more sophisticated crafts around the moons of Jupiter. It was very hard to believe 100 years ago today but the evidence of that first flight is all around us today.
200 years ago the borders of the United States stretched from the Atlantic to the Mississippi river and none other than Napoleon Bonaparte in France granted her the rights to trade on the Mississippi, and the held the right to impose a duty on every ship that sailed out of the mouth of the Mississippi in New Orleans. What made matters worse is that it looked like Napoleon was going to close the rights to the Mississippi to the Americans entirely. There was no way to expect Napoleon to give up this kind of control. But a U.S. ambassador to France, Robert R. Livingston, concocted a plan to trump Napoleon, and he played that trump with a flourish. He made it known in the right circles that the United States was considering settling its difference with Great Britain and reconciling with her politically. This Napoleon did not want. He was already close to war with England. So when James Monroe, who would later become president, along with Livingston, approached Napoleon?s men with the idea of a land treaty, they agreed. And on May 2, 1803 the Louisiana Purchase was made for three cents an acre. The humor in it all is this: Livingston and Monroe were never commissioned to make such a purpose. But now standing on the eastern banks of the Mississippi River 200 years ago it was hard to believe that the US would ever have the rights to that 828,000 square mile area. But it doubled the size of the United States and the evidence of that great purchase is all around us today.
300 years ago on June 17, 1703 a young boy named John was born to Rev. Samuel and Suzanna Wesley in Epworth England. It was perhaps no surprise that John grew up to become a priest himself. What was a surprise is the kind of ministry he implemented. He formed a small religious study group, which put special emphasis on methodical study and devotion. They had communion often, fasted twice a week, and as they grew they added other things: social services, visiting prisoners, care for the poor, and they even ran a school. Onlookers called them Methodist and it wasn't a polite term, it was said to mock them. When John left the group, it disintegrated. But the name stuck and the evidence of that early movement is all around us today. In almost every town in this country there is a Methodist Church.
There are events in life that amaze us, fill us with joy, and make us wonder whether it really is possible. It is hard to believe, even standing on this side of history, that some of these things were ever accomplished. They are impossible stories that positively happened.
2000 years ago 11 men gathered to discuss in private their next move. They were frightened and confused. Life seemed to be closing in on them and it was not possible for them to continue their three-year-old ministry. Here were the facts: They were betrayed by one of their own. The crowds had turned on them. Their leader had been executed. They had denied their relationship to their leader. And any further development of their leader's ideas would almost certainly mean their own deaths. Into this hopeless scene walks a man they never expected to see. They were so startled by this event that, to a man, they feared they were seeing a ghost. The resurrection amazed them, filled them with joy, and turned their lives around. It's an impossible story that positively happened and the evidence of the resurrection is all around us today.
What amazes you about the resurrection of Jesus? What impossible aspects of it fill you with joy? Let me share a couple of things that are amazing to me.
1. First, the reality of the resurrection amazes me (36-43).
2. Second, the scope of our mission amazes me (44-49).
32. The Inhabitants of Heaven
Illustration
Wilbur M. Smith
Of all the supernatural beings mentioned in the Scriptures, it is the angels who are constantly depicted as being identified with heaven. When the angel of God called to Hagar in the wilderness, we read that this call was heard "out of heaven" (Gen. 21:17). When the angel appeared at the time of the vision which Jacob heard at Bethel, he saw a ladder reaching to heaven on which the angels of God were ascending and descending. Often the angels are called the "heavenly ones" (Ps. 29:1) or the "heavenly host" (Luke 2:13). When the angelic host had finished their song to the shepherds, we read that "the angels went away with them into heaven" (Luke 2:15). It was an angel "from heaven" that rolled away the stone at the tomb where our Lord was buried (Matt. 28:2). Our Lord Himself often spoke of "the angels in heaven" (Mark 12:25; 13:32; Mate. 22:30). Then we have such a phrase as "the angels of heaven" (Matt. 24:36), and in a most interesting passage our Lord said, "Angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven" (Matt. 18:10).
33. When We Fail to Listen
Illustration
Brett Blair
A certain public school superintendent passed down a verbal set of instructions to his assistant concerning the appearance of Halley's Comet a few years back. The superintendent said:
Next Thursday at 10:30 a.m., Halley's Comet will appear over this area. This is an event that occurs only once every 75 years. Call the school principals and have them assemble their teachers and classes on their athletic fields, and explain the phenomena to them. If it rains, then cancel the day's observation and have the classes meet in the auditorium to see a film about the Comet.
The assistant superintendent telephoned the school principals with this message: By order of the superintendent of schools, next Thursday Halley's Comet will appear over your athletic field at 10:30 a.m. If it rains, then cancel the day's classes and report to the auditorium with your teachers and students, where you will be shown films, a phenomenal event which occurs only once every 75 years.
The principals told their teachers the following: By order of the phenomenal superintendent of schools, at 10:30 a.m. next Thursday, Halley's Comet will appear in the auditorium. In case of rain over the athletic field, the superintendent will give another order—something which occurs only once in every 75 years.
The teachers then told their students: Next Thursday at 10:30 a.m., the superintendent of schools will appear in our school auditorium with Halley's Comet—something which occurs every 75 years. If it rains, the superintendent will cancel the Comet and will order us out on our phenomenal athletic field.
By the time the message was taken home to parents by the students and it sounded like this: When it rains next Thursday at 10:30 a.m. over the school's athletic field, the phenomenal 75 year-old superintendent of schools will cancel all classes, and appear before the student body in the auditorium, accompanied by Bill Haley and the Comets.
When we fail to listen, we misinterpret or modify what we have heard. It is then that chaos and confusion come in. We practice selective listening and hear only what we want to hear! Good Shepherds listen carefully, attentively, and intentionally to the voice of the Master Shepherd. In listening to Jesus, we hear the instruction, guidance, and sensitivity we need in relating to members of our flock.
34. All That Remains
Illustration
Robert Wenz
The Queen Mary was the largest ship to cross the oceans when it was launched in 1936. Through four decades and a World War she served until she was retired, anchored as a floating hotel and museum in Long Beach, California.
During the conversion, her three massive smokestacks were taken off to be scraped down and repainted. But on the dock they crumbled. Nothing was left of the 3/4 inch steel plate from which the stacks had been formed. All that remained were more than thirty coats of paint that had been applied over the years. The steel had rusted away.
When Jesus called the Pharisees "Whitewashed tombs," He meant they had no substance, only an exterior appearance.
35. Breaking Through in Little Ways
Illustration
When Jesus tells John's people what to look for, it's not big, grandiose stuff. As concerns signs of the kingdom, Jesus points to people who couldn't see much, seeing more...people who couldn't climb out of bed in the morning, playing Ring Around the Rosie in the townsquare...Previously untouchable lepers kissing their wives and hugging their children....and the poor, hearing a good sermon for a change. And I suppose if you're blind, lame, poor or your skin used to be all scales and scabs, that's big time stuff. But can you build a kingdom on it?
Apparently, Jesus thinks you can. He doesn't care whether it's "big time stuff" or not. As concerns the kingdom, it breaks through in little ways. But it breaks through. As if to illustrate his point, he talks about a seed that nobody can see growing. But it's in there. I mean, it's already in there. You aren't going to see it come to maturity all at once. Like the hymn says, "First the blade, then the ear, then the full corn shall appear."
No, you may not see it. But neither are you going to be able to stop it. It's like that dandelion that finds a crack in the asphalt. Or creates a crack in the asphalt. Not only does it have presence, but there is an inevitability to its appearance.
36. A Vision of Heaven
Illustration
Johnny Cash
In recent years there have been a number of stories in the "Life After Life" vein. One of the most moving that I have read is the story that is told by singer Johnny Cash about the death of his brother, Jack, in 1944. Jack was two years older than Johnny and had always been his hero and model. On Saturday, May 12, 1944, Jack went to work at a workshop, cutting fence posts. Johnny had tried to talk Jack into going to a movie with him that day, but funds were low and the family needed the money.
While at the workshop Jack fell across the table saw and was badly injured. He was rushed to the hospital, but they didn't expect him to live through the day. He lingered for a week, in and out of consciousness, sometimes hallucinating, then back into a coma. After a week of his condition worsening, it was obvious that he was going to die. The family gathered in the hospital room. Jack was swollen from the ravages of the traumatic injury. Johnny Cash tells the story:
I remember standing in line to tell him good-bye. He was still unconscious. I bent over his bed and put my cheek against his and said, ‘Good bye, Jack.' That's all I could get out.
My mother and daddy were on their knees. At 6:30 A.M. he woke up. He opened his eyes and looked around and said, ‘Why is everybody crying over me? Mama, don't cry over me. Did you see the river?'
And she said, ‘No, I didn't, Son.'
‘Well, I thought I was going toward the fire, but I'm headed in the other direction now, Mama. I was going down a river, and there was fire on one side and heaven on the other. I was crying, ‘God, I'm supposed to go to heaven. Don't You remember? Don’t take me to the fire.' All of a sudden, I turned, and said, ‘Now, Mama, can you hear the angels singing?'
She said, ‘No, Son, I can' t hear it.'
And he squeezed her hand and shook her arm, saying, ‘But Mama, you've got to hear it.' Tears started rolling off his cheeks and he said, ‘Mama, listen to the angels. I'm going there, Mama.'
We listened with astonishment.
‘What a beautiful city,' he said. ‘And the angels singing. Oh Mama, I wish you could hear the angels singing.' Those were his last words. And he died.
The memory of Jack's death, his vision of heaven, the effect his life had on the lives of others, and the image of Christ he projected have been more of an inspiration to me, I suppose, than anything else that has ever come to me through any man.
37. I Am the Bread of Life - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
Sometime this week you will make a trip to the grocery store to get a loaf of bread. It will be readily available on the shelf. There will be quite a variety to choose from. You will pay little attention to the price, not realizing that the packaging that the bread is wrapped in actually costs more than the wheat that is in the bread. All in all, you will think it a very uneventful trip, but you will be wrong.
It is quite difficult for me, as an American, to understand the importance of bread unless I turn on my TV and watch what is going on in so many parts of the world today. When there is no staff of life there is suffering and famine. A simple loaf of bread: Something, which we do not give a second thought, but in certain parts of the world it means life itself.
It is only as we comprehend that situation that we can really begin to understand the importance of bread not only now but also in the time of Jesus. Just think for a moment how so many significant theological events in the Bible revolve around the subject of bread. The most important event in the Old Testament of course, was the Exodus event the trip from Egypt to the Promised Land. But what caused the Hebrews to be in Egypt in the first place? It was for want of bread you will recall. The wheat crop had failed due to draught, and the Hebrews had migrated to the land of the Pharaoh because there was a surplus in storage there. It was bread, or the lack of it, that initiated this whole chain of events.
Later, when the Jews were on their way to the Promised Land, and they were facing starvation in the bleak wilderness, God rained down bread from heaven, as it was called, in the form of manna.
When Jesus began his ministry, he went into the dessert where he was tempted. As the hot sun braced down upon him, he looked out with sweaty eyes at the round white rocks, and we are told that they took on the appearance of loaves of bread. Satan was tempting Jesus to give bread to the people and end the suffering of world hunger. Yet, Jesus spurned that temptation because, he said, that man cannot live by bread alone.
One day Jesus was praying by the roadside when the disciples walked up and saw him. They were so impressed by the genuine nature of his prayer that they implored him: Master, teach us how to pray. It was in the midst of the Master's prayer that he reminds us of the importance of the staff of life. He prayed: Give us this day our daily bread.
Bread is central to the major stories of the bible but...
1. To satisfy your hunger for heaven you cannot eat the bread of earth.
2. To satisfy your hunger for heaven you must eat the bread of heaven.
38. Faith and Expectation
Illustration
Larry Powell
Acts1:4-14 contains certain encouragements to the followers of Christ to be an "expectant" fellowship. With this in mind, let us consider some specific instances where expectancy is implied.
1. Acts 1:5: "For John baptized with water but before many days you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit." What is the difference between John’s water baptism and the baptism of the Holy Spirit?
a. John’s baptism. Water baptism was commonly practiced by the Jews long before the appearance of John. It symbolized religious purification, and in a more specialized use it was applied when new converts entered into Judaism (proselyte baptism). John, however, baptized both Jews and Gentiles as a rote of moral purification for the approaching Kingdom of God. Although John’s baptism would enable those who submitted to it to meet the "Day of the Lord," it was to be distinguished as different from a future baptism, administered by one who "will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire."
b. Baptism of the Holy Spirit. This baptism consists not in symbolic gestures of initiation, but in the receiving of "power." It does not ordain anybody for, or against, the future but rather manifests itself in a spiritual experience in the present. An initiatory baptism is symbolically accomplished once, whereas the baptism of the Holy Spirit may occur quite unrehearsed many times over. The element of expectation is contained in the selected scripture by the phrase, "But before many days, you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit."
2. Acts 1:7-8: "It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father had fixed by his own authority. But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you." The disciples have just asked Jesus a legitimate question regarding the nature of his mission. A simple "yes" or "no" answer would not have been sufficient inasmuch as if he replied, "Yes (I have come to restore the Kingdom of Israel)," it would have been a lie, and if he had replied "No," they would have become disillusioned with him in the beginning. Instead, he informs them that it is not for them to know all the mysteries of God - but there is a consolation: "You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you." Perhaps it is like saying to someone, "You cannot adequately define love, but nonetheless you can experience it." Here, the power of the Holy Spirit is promised, and they are encouraged to expect it in their own experience.
3. Acts 1:11: "Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into heaven?" I suppose the most logical answer would have been, "Because we are bewildered!" It would have been extremely difficult to have acted otherwise while witnessing their Lord being lifted up into heaven on a cloud. If that were not enough, two men in white robes suddenly appeared to stand by them and question their amazement. In all probability, at least one of the inferences here is that rather than gazing into heaven, it would be more proper to get on with the business of the Kingdom, teaching and preaching, and doing "whatsoever I have commanded you." However, they should pursue their tasks of soul-winning with an attitude of expectancy because "this Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way."
4. Acts 1:14. "All those with one accord devoted themselves to prayer." And we may be sure that their prayers contained expectancy. Expectancy for what? For the baptism of the Holy Spirit and the return of the risen Lord.
39. Going Beyond Duty: The Second Mile
Illustration
James Merritt
Shortly after the battles ended the American Revolution, but before the peace had been negotiated, George Washington was with his troops in Newburgh, New York. But they began to grow very restless because they hadn't been paid. Washington had begged the Continental Congress to do what they said they would do and pay the soldiers, but they refused.
Well, some of the officers began to organize a rebellion. They talked about marching on Philadelphia, which was at that time the seat of the reigning national government, and overthrowing that government and letting the army rule the nation.
With the fate of America in the balance, George Washington made a surprise appearance before these officers. After praising them for their service and thanking them for their sacrifice, he pulled from his pocket a copy of a speech that he wished to read. But then he fumbled with a paper and finally reached for a set of reading glasses-glasses those men had never seen him wear before. Washington made this simple statement: "I have already grown grey in the service of my country, and now I am going blind."
Historian Richard Norton Smith wrote: "Instantly rebellion melted into tears. It was a galvanizing moment, and the rebellion..." and there rebellion was put down because they had seen before them a second miler. Becoming a Christian is one thing; being a Christian is another one. Every chance you get for the glory of Jesus, for the goodness of others, and because of the grace of God, go the second mile.
40. Narrow Vision
Illustration
Editor James S. Hewett
In the year 1870 the Methodists in Indiana were having their annual conference. At one point, the president of the college where they were meeting said, "I think we live in a very exciting age." The presiding bishop said, "What do you see?" The college president responded, "I believe we are coming into a time of great inventions. I believe, for example, that men will fly through the air like birds." The Bishop said, "This is heresy! The Bible says that flight is reserved for the angels. We will have no such talk here." After the conference, the bishop, whose name was Wright, went home to his two small sons, Wilbur and Orville. And you know what they did to their father's vision.
41. Sermon Opener - When Our Children Teach Us
Illustration
James W. Moore
Some years ago, the Journal of the American Medical Association published an article by Dr. Paul Ruskin on the "Stages of Aging." In the article, Dr. Ruskin described a case study he had presented to his students when teaching a class in medical school. He described the case study patient under his care like this:
"The patient neither speaks nor comprehends the spoken word. Sometimes she babbles incoherently for hours on end. She is disoriented about person, place, and time. She does, however, respond to her name… I have worked with her for the past six months, but she still shows complete disregard for her physical appearance and makes no effort to assist her own care. She must be fed, bathed, and clothed by others.
"Because she has no teeth, her food must be pureed. Her shirt is usually soiled from almost incessant drooling. She does not walk. Her sleep pattern is erratic. Often she wakes in the middle of the night and her screaming awakens others. Most of the time she is friendly and happy, but several times a day she gets quite agitated without apparent cause. Then she wails until someone comes to comfort her."
After presenting the class with this challenging case, Dr. Ruskin then asked his students if any of them would like to volunteer to take care of this person. No one volunteered. Then Dr. Ruskin said, "I'm surprised that none of you offered to help, because actually she is my favorite patient. I get immense pleasure from taking care of her and I am learning so much from her. She has taught me a depth of gratitude I never knew before. She has taught me the spirit of unwavering trust. And she has taught me the power of unconditional love." Then Dr. Ruskin said, "Let me show you her picture." He pulled out the picture and passed it around. It was the photo of his six-month-old baby daughter.
Now, I like that story for several reasons. For one thing, it shows us the importance of perspective. And it shows us how essential it is to have all the facts before we make a decision. It reminds us too, that our children have so much to teach us if we will tune in and pay attention. But also, it reminds me of this dramatic scene in the Gospel of Luke where Jesus lingers behind as a 12-year-old boy and gets separated from His family for three days. Eventually they find Him in the Temple discussing theology with the rabbis.
Now, we can imagine that as Jesus was growing up, His parents taught Him many good lessons about life and faith… but imagine, too, the powerful lessons they must have learned from Him. Our children have so much to teach us. With that in mind, let's think together for a few moments about the great lessons our children are teaching us. There are many of course. Let me mention three of them:
1. First, our children can teach us gratitude.
2. Second, they teach us love.
3. And third, children can teach us faith.
42. Turning Point
Illustration
John R. Steward
When I was in college my professor and good friend Dr. James Kallas would speak of the resurrection of Christ as being similar to the turning point in a war. He would use the Battle of the Bulge in World War II as an example. In recent years you could point to the Gulf War against Iraq. I remember how so many people predicted that this would be a very bloody war. They would point out how large Iraq's army was and that we should be prepared for many casualties coming home injured or in body bags. People were genuinely concerned and it was somewhat uncertain just how things would work out. Then the war began with the fighter jets bombing Iraq. In only two or three days, the Americans had obtained air superiority. When air superiority was achieved, there was no longer any doubt as to who the victor would be in that war. However, it was not at that moment when the war was over or when the killing would stop. It was the turning point in the war when we knew for certain who the victor would be in the end.
That is how it is with the resurrection of Jesus Christ. His resurrection is the turning point in the battle with "sin, death, and the power of the devil." We now know that, in the end, the ultimate victory is ours because of the resurrection of Jesus. "
43. Immortality: Quality vs. Quantity
Illustration
Gary R. Habermas & J.P. Moreland
While none of the actual terms for immortality are found in the gospel teachings of Jesus, he addresses the subject in passages such as Luke 20:27-40 and John 11:25-26. Strawson claims that, for Jesus and his Jewish contemporaries, immortality was synonymous with resurrection (Jesus and the Future Life, p. 209). Murray Harris holds that, while the two terms are distinct, they are also inseparable, for the resurrection inevitably involves the acquiring of immortality. They are interdependent sides of the same truth. See his volume, Raised Immortal: Resurrection and Immortality in the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1983), pp. 199-201, 209-214, 232-236, for a stimulating and detailed study of this subject.
We also want to be clear that the term immortality is not to be confused with notions such as the Greek concept of immortality of the soul. Actually, three Greek synonyms (athanasia, aphtharsia, aphtartos) are used only eleven times in the New Testament (ten by Paul and one by Peter) to refer to the believer's life after death. In no case are these terms applied directly to the human soul. In fact, the Greek teaching had very little influence in Palestine anyway. For several reasons why Paul, in particular, opposed this Greek belief, see the next section of this chapter. Further, Paul specifically used immortality and eternal life in a related manner in Rom. 2:7 (cf. Gal. 6:8; 2 Tim. 1:10), while interchanging his references to immortality and the resurrection of the body in 1 Cor. 15:50-55. He thereby asserts that the term eternal life in the New Testament "refers primarily to quality ... secondarily to quantity ... Immortality, on the other hand, refers primarily to quantity ... and secondarily to quality" (see p. 199; cf. pp. 273-275).
44. In Focus
Illustration
Henry Bosch
On the back of a pulpit in one church were printed these words: “Sir, we would see Jesus!” They were a reminder to the minister that he must never allow anything--no matter how good or interesting--to distract him from focusing on the Savior.
Peter, James, and John needed this reminder too when they witnessed Jesus’ transfiguration and the appearance of Moses and Elijah. Commenting on this account, J. B. Nicholson suggests that when Peter said, “Lord, it is good for us,” he was focusing on the wonderful experience. Nicholson then says, “Peter was sidetracked, and the Father had to open heaven and speak to him. He said, ‘This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear Him.’” God put the focus where it belonged, on Christ.
Sin diverts some believers from focusing on Jesus. Too much study and feverish activity distracts others. Such things as doctrines and church attendance, good as they are, must not become our main concerns. We are to keep Jesus at the center of our spiritual attention.
Is the Lord Jesus Christ the primary object of your love and devotion?
45. Looking for Signs
Illustration
Larry Powell
Several years agoI was a member of the Arkansas delegation which attended a jurisdictional seminar of some sort in Dallas, Texas. Our delegation included an exceptional Christian gentlemen, whose name you would probably recognize, just recently assigned as the Episcopal leader of the Arkansas Area. As a matter of fact, he had moved into the Episcopal residence only two weeks prior to the seminar. One evening as we filed slowly past a buffet table to fill our plates, I chanced to be behind two members of the conference from which the new bishop had come. One of the gentlemen nudged his companion, nodded toward the new bishop, and said under his breath, "Does he look like a bishop to you?" The companion continued to heap up his plate, smiled, and softly replied, "No way." Apparently, they saw no sign of authority in his gentle manner, no sign of dignity in his congeniality, no sign of spiritual aura about his unpretentious appearance. Brother, were they wrong!
Some people are always looking for signs. It is not a new thing under the sun. How many times do you suppose it was remarked behind Jesus’ back, "Does he look like a messiah to you?" Joseph’s son he was; a carpenter by trade, wearing a mother-made robe, keeping company with the blue-collar element, and stirring up everything that had been settled. Oh, there were signs all right ... signs that he was in league with the Prince of Darkness: a miracle here, an exorcism there, taking liberty with the Scriptures, condemning the establishment. How could any rational person believe him? But rational people did believe him. What is more, many believed him without a sign. That is actually the emphasis of what we are about here ... that he was believed without a sign.
1. The Gospel according to John tells us that many Samaritans believed in Jesus because of the testimony of the woman at the well (4:7-30). However, let us hasten to verse 42; "They said to the woman, ‘It is no longer because of your words that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this is indeed the Savior of the world.’ "
2. John further relates that when Jesus came to Capernaum, an official prevailed upon him to heal his son who was at the point of death. Jesus said, "Unless you see signs and wonders you will not believe" (v. 48). The official impressed Jesus by answering, "Sir, come down before my child dies" (v. 49). In other words, without benefit of signs, the man already believed. Jesus rewarded the official’s faith by saying, "Go; your son will live" (v. 50). Now, take notice of the response: "The man believed the word that Jesus spoke to him and went on his way" (50). He believed before the sign (4:51-53).
Is your belief contingent upon a sign? If so, what? A supernatural event, a special feeling, a bush of fire, or on the other hand, is your belief and faith in Christ operative beyond dependency upon signs?
46. Roosevelt's Life: After Tragedy
Illustration
Edmund Morrison
When Theodore Roosevelt was an Assembly man in the legislature of the state of New York, events developed in his personal life that would wound him deeply. On February 13, Roosevelt, seated on the floor of the Assembly, received a telegram informing him that his wife Alice had given birth to a baby girl late the night before. He received the congratulations of his colleagues but decided to finish work on legislative matters before leaving for home to be with his family.
Several hours later he received another telegram telling him that his wife was very ill and so too his mother. He immediately left for the train station. The train seemed to move very slowly down the Hudson Valley. Normally, the trip took five hours but during this journey it would be longer due to the heavy fog. All Roosevelt could do was to read the two telegrams over and over again. When he finally did arrive at the station, it was difficult to find his home because of the fog.
When he did find his home, he found that Alice, ill with Bright's disease, was semi-comatose and near death. Alice barely recognized him as he sat with her in his arms. Not only was his wife near death, but also his mother Mittie was dying with typhoid fever on the floor below. Theodore Roosevelt was informed that if he wanted to see his mother for the last time he had better do that now.
Finally, at three in the morning, Mittie died and Theodore went back upstairs to be with Alice. As morning came, the fog became even worse and then by mid-morning there was rain, which was eventually followed by a brief appearance of the sun. When the morning passed over into the afternoon, Alice died. It was February 14, 1884, and Roosevelt wrote in his diary: "The light was gone out of my life." Two days after Alice's death, he wrote in his diary: "For joy or sorrow, my life has now been lived out."
Imagine, Theodore Roosevelt believed that his life was virtually over. He saw very little reason to go on with life. Yet this is the same man who would go on to be the President of the United States. As President, he would develop our national park system, develop laws against abusive child labor and laws to regulate the nation's food supply, develop the Panama Canal, and will always be remembered for the immortal words "speak softly and carry a big stick." Obviously, his life was not over when his mother and wife died. Even at the marriage feast in Cana in Galilee, Jesus proved that God can do far more than we can ever anticipate. When we think that all hope is lost, God is still in the miracle business.
47. The Boy Jesus
Illustration
Brett Blair
You will recall when the old man Simeon held the Christ child in his arms he said, "This child is destined to cause the rising and the falling of many in Israel, and he will be a sign that will be spoken against, so that the hearts of many will be revealed."
There are two well-known pictures, each with the same title, "The Shadow of the Cross." One by Holeman Hunt depicts the interior of a carpenter's shop, with Joseph and the Boy Jesus at work. Mary is also present. The Boy Jesus pauses in his work, and as he stretches his arms the shadow of the cross is cast on the wall.
The other picture is a popular engraving which depicts the boy Jesus running with outstretched arms to his mother, the shadow of the cross being cast on the ground by his form as he runs. Both pictures are fanciful in form, but their underlying message is true. If we read the Gospels just as they stand, it is clear that the death of Jesus Christ was really in view almost from the outset of his earthly appearance. At first sight there seems little in them about his death, but as we look deeper we see more. It was part of the divine purpose and plan for him from the first, and very early we have a hint of the cross.
48. The Lord’s Prayer: A Walking Prayer
Illustration
Kenneth W. Collins
Every evening I walk three miles as part of my losing campaign against high blood pressure and my imperialistic waist line. I generally don’t wear an iPod, because I prefer to take my exercise without anesthesia. (I enjoy the sounds of nature, and I want to be able to hear the cars honk before they run me over.) Sometimes I devote the time to prayer, and I have found that the Lord’s Prayer makes a good outline. Here’s how I do it:
I address God as my Father by adoption through the grace of Jesus Christ and give thanks for His salvation.
I pledge to keep His name holy in all my conduct. I remind Him of ways I have done this in the past, and ask Him forgiveness for all the ways I have failed to do so as well.
I ask that His will be done, here on earth through me, as efficiently as it is done by His angels in heaven. I give examples of how I think I could do that; I ask His guidance and pledge my obedience.
I ask for my material needs for the day, itemizing and discussing them. I give thanks for specific instances of His providence in the past.
I ask forgiveness, but only to the degree I am willing to forgive others. If I have a problem, I discuss it in detail.
If I am facing any particular temptations, I discuss them and ask God to help me resist them. If I have recently survived any tough tests, I discuss them and thank God that He gave me the power to overcome them.
I tell God about the evil things that frighten me, and ask Him to deliver me from them. I also give thanks for past rescues.
You get the idea. When you pray like this, it’s amazing how time flies!
49. What Kind of Cross?
Illustration
Larry Powell
Not long ago, a hard-rock singer reknowned for his notorious over indulgence in mind-altering drugs appeared on television to scream, lunge, and gyrate through one of his bestselling songs. Inasmuch as the rather badly garbled words were totally incomprehensible to me, I turned my attention to the bizarre, uninhibited attire of this widely heralded "artist." Not to dwell on the flamboyance of his appearance, I wish only to point out that dangling from an expensive chain around his neck was a large cross. Perhaps it was there as a counterstatement, a message of rebellion to institutional religion, or perhaps he simply counted it as an attractive piece of jewelry. I do not know. But more and more, the cross is appearing on necklaces, earrings, bracelets, and the like as fashionable symbols, which is all right, I suppose, except that the behavior of those brandishing them is not always consistent with what the cross represents. If a person in ancient Rome had adorned himself with a cross, it would have been the equivalent of someone today wearing the likeness of the electric chair around his neck. The cross was originally not considered to be a thing of beauty. It conveyed pain, humiliation, and death. It still does, except in the Christian context. Another dimension was added to Calvary ... victory.
Jesus issued a call to discipleship, but the invitation contained an inherent inhibitor: "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me." A cross of adornment or embellishment was not what Jesus had in mind. Self-denial and risking the consequences of following the way of Christ are at the heart of the call to discipleship.
In the eighteenth century, a German artist, Stenberg, was walking through the market place of his home town when he was attracted to the face of a dancing gypsy girl. He invited her to sit for him in his studio as a model. Accepting his invitation, she enabled Stenberg to paint his famous "Dancing Gypsy Girl." There is more. The young girl was greatly impressed by what she saw in the artist’s studio, particularly a painting in progress titled "Crucifixion." Arrested by the painting, she said one day to Stenberg, "He must have been a very bad man to have been nailed to a cross like that." Stenberg replied, "No, he was a good man. The best man who ever lived. Indeed, he died for all men." The girl asked, "Did he die for you?" Stenberg had never really made such a personal application of his explanation. He was led to search the Scriptures, and in a few short weeks, he discovered the answer and surrendered himself to Christ. Returning to his painting of the "Crucifixion," he added these words beneath the likeness of Christ on the cross: "This I did for thee; what hast thou done for me?" There is more. A young aristocratic count, Zinzendorf by name, chanced to observe the painting, paused to meditate at both the depiction and the words, and was so moved that he went on to found the Moravians.
There are elements of power and attraction about the cross. There also is an inaudible appeal: "This I did for thee; what hast thou done for me?" Have we denied ourselves and taken up our cross, whatever it may be, and followed him?
50. A Good Judge of Character
Illustration
King Duncan
A certain young woman was nervous about meeting her boyfriend's parents for the first time. As she checked out her appearance one last time, she noticed that her shoes looked dingy. So she gave them a fast swipe with the paper towel she had used to blot the bacon she had for breakfast.
Arriving at the impressive home, she was greeted by the parents and their much-beloved, but rotten-tempered, poodle. The dog got a whiff of the bacon grease on the young woman's shoes and followed her around all evening. At the end of the evening, the pleased parents remarked, "Cleo really likes you, dear, and she is an excellent judge of character. We are delighted to welcome you into our little family."
It seems that perhaps Cleo was a better judge of bacon grease than she was a judge of character.
The Pharisees believed that Jesus wasn't a very good judge of character. Think back to our scripture reading for today.
Showing
1
to
50
of
305
results
- UK tribunal member rebuked for bias in Christian teacher’s case: 'Undermining trust'
- Jeremiah Johnson’s brother claims he faked pro-Trump prophecies, visions
- Calvin Robinson warns UK on 'cusp of a civil war' amid simmering tensions, riots
- Episcopal Church launches AI chatbot ‘AskCathy’
- Biden opens up about why he quit race, points to pressure from Democrats: ‘A transition president’
- Illinois law threatens religious employers' right to hire staff who share their beliefs, ADF warns
- Archaeologists uncover quarry stones possibly used to build road walked by Jesus, disciples
- Harrison Butker defends speech comments as he becomes NFL's highest-paid kicker
- 'So many questions, so few answers': Nelon daughter's faith endures amid tragic plane crash
- Iranian 'surprise' attack on Israel could 'even last three to four days,' says Iranian lawmaker
- Died: Patricia Gundry, Evangelical Feminist Who Wanted Women to Be Free
- Some Churches Lose Coverage as Insurers Hit by a Wave of Storm Claims
- The Olympics’ Most Iconic Photo Has a Christian Message
- Died: Doris Brougham, Missionary Who Taught English to Taiwan
- Walz’s Brand Is More Left than Lutheran Among Minnesota Evangelicals
- Why Changes to India’s Colonial Criminal Code Concern Christians
- Gordon College Loses Religious Liberty Case for Loan Forgiveness
- Yes, Fiji Olympians Are Singing Hymns
- Churches Find a Homelessness Solution in Their Own Backyards
- Venezuelan Churches Brace for Migration Wave After Disputed Maduro Election
- A woman dies after being caught in a baggage carousel, and more shocking news
- Queenie Hallegua, second-to-last Jewish resident of historic Indian Jewish community, dies at 89
- 4 Signs That A Marriage Is Sure To End In Divorce—By A Psychologist
- Prominent German cantor and opera singer is killed in what police say was a family dispute
- To the Left, Now Even Viewpoint Diversity Is ‘White Supremacy’
- Triptii Dimri and Avinash Tiwary’s Laila Majnu Goes From Box Office Dud To Soft Hit After Its Rerelease
- Stretched 12 inches on the rack, crushed in iron maidens… or killed with an 'anal pear': Terrifying...
- The Druze Religion, Explained
- Iran’s Chief Rabbi observes Tisha B’Av in Tehran - watch
- Megan Basham Reveals How ‘Non-Christian Billionaires’ Are Co-opting Churches For Democrats
- Where is the Most Religious Place in the World?
- Bigoted Kamala Harris and Her Long History of Faith-Based Discrimination
- Why the Temple Curtain was Torn in Two When Jesus Died
- Parishes Preparing Their People for...What Exactly?
- 10 Years After Ferguson: What Does It Mean to Be the Church?
- You Cannot Lie Your Way to the Truth
- American Gen Z: Depressed and Spiritually Hungry
- Time to Reclaim Jewish Indigeneity
- Case Dismissed Against Man Charged in Death of Synagogue Leader
- New Book Explores Richard Nixon's Religious Journey